Thursday, June 30, 2022

Demonstrated Leadership and the Pursuit of Ethics in Special Education

When teachers are provided on-going opportunities to learn through experiences, experiment with new ideas, and then creatively implement new programs; they are more likely to become teacher leaders in both their schools and communities.  These opportunities are beneficial by allowing prospective teacher leaders to develop broader perspectives related to the identified needs within schools and across the district.  This encourages reflection about their own practices and provides variety in their work and recognition of their expertise.  These roles and opportunities thereby influence others and serve as critical forms of ethical renewal for the field of special education.

The great divide in education may not be between general and special educators but rather between community ethics compared to professional ethics.  Although values and ethics are frequently used interchangeably, the two terms are not identical. Values pertains to beliefs and attitudes that provide direction to everyday living, whereas ethics pertains to the beliefs we hold about what constitutes right conduct. Ethics are moral principles adopted by an individual or group to provide rules for right conduct. As noted by Remley and Herlihy (2016), ethics are aspirational goals representing the maximum or ideal standards set by the profession, practiced through your professional behavior and interactions.

If you agree that it is essential to place principles before personalities, then as an ethical professional you would seek to integrate virtue ethics and principled ethics to reach better ethical decisions and policies. Let's take this moment to differentiate between principled ethics and virtue ethics. Principled ethics are a set of obligations and a method that focuses on moral issues with the goals of solving a particular dilemma or set of dilemmas and establishing a framework to guide future ethical thinking and behavior (Meara, Schmidt, & Day, 1996). By contrast, virtue ethics focus upon the professional's character traits and nonobligatory ideals to which she or he aspires rather than on solving specific ethical dilemmas.

Reflecting upon principled ethics we tend to ask, ‘Is this unethical?’ By contrast, in the pursuit of virtue ethics we might reflect upon whether one is doing what is best for his or her followers, clients, or students. Crucially, virtue ethics requires consciousness of ethical behavior. Therefore, the virtuous professional would deem it unethical to use approaches or techniques that might not result in the greatest benefit to her or his followers, clients, or students or to use any techniques to which he or she has not been thoroughly trained, even if their use might not be prohibited in practice.

Therefore, virtue ethics focus upon ideals rather than obligations and on the character of the professional rather than on the action itself. Thus, the intentional demonstration of principles before personalities.  Five characteristics of virtuous professionals were described by Meara et al (1996).  These were:

·       Virtuous agents are motivated to do what is right because they judge it to be right, not just because they feel obligated or fear the consequences.

·    Virtuous agents rely on vision and discernment, which involve sensitivity, judgment, and understanding that lead to decisive action.

·      Virtuous agents have compassion and are sensitive to the suffering of others. They are able to take actions to reduce their clients’ pain.

· Virtuous agents are self-aware. They know how their assumptions, convictions, and biases are likely to affect their interactions with others.

·  Virtuous agents are connected with and understand the mores of their community and the importance of community in moral decision making, policy setting, and character development. They understand the ideals and expectations of their community.

So, how can special educators become empowered to always demonstrate principles before personalities? Finding few references to the leadership roles of special educators, Billingsley (2007) explored potential contributions of teacher leadership for special education by reviewing select teacher literature from general education-- including the “emergence of new teacher roles in schools, the roots and meanings of teacher leadership, and potential benefits of teacher leadership” (p. 164).  Analyzed research, drawn conclusions, and provided implications for future practice or research by York-Barr, Sommerness, Duke, and Ghere, (2005); Bays and Crockett (2007); as well as Billingsley (2007) were each grounded within the conceptual framework of special education leadership and the ethical treatment of students with special needs.  While each study’s limited sample certainly restricts the ability to generalize results, the shared references amongst and between the collective researchers served to narrow the focus of each study while expanding the implications of individual results to the field of special education and educational leadership.

Conducting a meta-analysis of nearly 50 articles and studies was conducted in addition to a case-study interview with a special education teacher who possessed nearly thirty- years of experience during which time she reviewed the professional literature to develop the Supports with Imagination and Meaning (SWIM) program, Billingsley (2007) selected and reviewed teacher leadership literature in general education, including the emergence of new teacher roles in schools, roots and meanings of teacher leadership, and possible benefits of teachers as leaders.  After reviewing several examples of teacher leadership in special education, Billingsley investigated barriers to teacher leadership and ways of supporting the work of teacher leaders.  As a result, Billingsley found support in the literature for the belief that serving the needs of students with disabilities requires multiple leaders across school-wide and district-wide levels.  Teacher leadership can be present in different forms for varied purposes, including management, instruction, and school reform.  Therefore, teacher leadership may be structured either formally or informally as it evolves through presented opportunities and explicit needs within schools.

Special educators become leaders by adeptly confronting barriers to the education of students who have disabilities, rather than accepting the norms and values of the status quo (Billingsley, 2007, p. 166).  Through focus group interviews with special educators selected based on documented effectiveness serving students with low-incidence disabilities York-Barr et al. (2005) found it is better to “understand their realities of practice in inclusive education and to identify supports for such practice” (p. 193). Although York-Barr et al did not specifically focus upon teacher leadership, they did discuss how special educators served as “informal leaders” (p. 200) by articulating “a sophisticated understanding of how their schools and districts functioned organizationally and politically” (p. 193). They also suggested that teacher leaders provided the vision, direction, and plans for special education and encouraged prospective teacher leaders to collaborate and advocate across multiple levels within their educational systems, thereby leveraging the social, structural and fiscal resources beneficial for students with disabilities.  In doing so, prospective teacher leaders project a concrete understanding that the degree to which they are connected in a school influences the degree to which students with disabilities are connected, supported, and provided opportunities for success within the culture of the school (p. 211).

The invitational leadership model provides a comprehensive design that is inclusive of many vital elements needed for the success of today’s educational organizations. As cited by Burns and Martin (2010, “Invitational theory is a collection of assumptions that seek to explain phenomena and provide a means of intentionally summoning people to realize their relatively boundless potential in all areas of worthwhile human endeavor” (Purkey, 2016, p.5).  Studies by Purkey & Siegel (2013) as well as Burns and Martin (2010), posited leadership advancing Invitational Education (IE) theory would encourage people to tap into their unlimited potential. IE theory includes vital elements needed for success within today’s educational organizations (Burns & Martin, 2010). Therefore, teacher preparation and graduate programs intending to develop highly qualified teacher leaders are ethically obligated to seek to identify and optimize professional development based on correlates addressing educational leadership (Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, 2022). Optimal educational leadership has been identified as a correlate that promotes sustained school success (Lezotte & Snyder, 2011).

Clearly further research on teacher leadership in special education is required to promote the opportunities for teacher leaders in schools and optimize student learning in the least restrictive environment, which is the clearest indicator of professional ethics. Possible research questions suggested by Billingsley include:

  • What is the nature of teacher leaders’ roles at the school (e.g., elementary, secondary) and district levels?
  • What factors (e.g., personal, organizational, preparation) influence the exercise of special education leadership by both special and general educators?

o   How does the culture of the district and school influence teacher leaders’ work?

o   How do special education leaders learn to work within the social organization of their schools?” (173)

Additionally, related to previous research by Anderson (2017), it is not yet known if and to what degree public schools that are led by leaders exhibiting high emotional intelligence (EQ) would have teachers exhibiting high EQ.  Are such schools more likely to have students receiving education in an inclusive setting?  These are crucial questions that invite further research on effective teacher leadership in special education.   


To Cite:

Anderson, C.J. (June 30, 2022). Demonstrated leadership and the pursuit of ethics in special education. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References

Anderson, C. J. (2017). Examining demonstrated emotional intelligence and perceptions of inviting schools. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 23, 35-61. 

 

Bagley, S. & Tang, K. (2018) Teacher leadership in special education: Exploring skills, roles,

and perceptions. Journal of Interdisciplinary Teacher Leadership (JoITL) 2  (1) Dec

 

Bays, D. A., & Crockett, J. B. (2007). Investigating instructional leadership for special

            education. Exceptionality, 15(3), 143-161. doi:10.1080/09362830701503495

 

Billingsley, B. S. (2007). Recognizing and supporting the critical roles of teachers in special

            education leadership. Exceptionality, 15(3), 163-176. doi:10.1080/09362830701503503

 

Burns, G., & Martin, B. N. (2010). Examination of the Effectiveness of Male and Female

Educational Leaders Who Made Use of the Invitational Leadership Style of Leadership. Journal of Invitational Theory & Practice, 1629-55. Retrieved from EBSCOhost

 Crockett, J. B. (2007). INTRODUCTION: The Changing Landscape of Special Education             Administration. Exceptionality, 15(3), 139-142. doi:10.1080/09362830701503487

 

Lashley, C. (2007). Principal leadership for special education: An ethical framework.

            Exceptionality, 15(3), 177-187. doi:10.1080/09362830701503511

Lezotte, L. W., & Snyder, K. M. (2011). What effective schools do: Re-envisioning the             Correlates. Solution Tree Press

Meara, N.S. Schmidt, L.D., & Day, J.D. (1996) Principles and virtues: A foundation of ethical decisions, policies, and character; The Counseling Psychologist, 24 (1), 24-31.

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J.M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education (2nd ed). The International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:

https://www.invitationaleducation.net/product-category/books/

Purkey, W. W., & Siegel, B. L. (2013). Becoming an invitational leader: A new approach yo professional and personal success. Humanics. Retrieved from: 

http://invitationaleducation.net/featuredbooks.html

Remley, T.P. & Herlihy, B. (2016). Ethical, legal, and professional issues in counseling (5th ed.). Pearson

 

Shapiro, J., & Stefkovich, J. (2000). Ethical leadership and decision making in education :

            Applying theoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,

            Inc. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

 

York-Barr, J., Sommerness, J., Duke, K., & Ghere, G. (2005). Special educators in inclusive

            education programmes: reframing their work as teacher leadership. International Journal

            of Inclusive Education, 9(2), 193-215. doi:10.1080/1360311042000339374


No comments:

Post a Comment