Twelve Research-based Components for an Effective Teacher Preparation

To address teacher shortages in New York State (NYS), the Northeast and Islands  Regional Educational Laboratory (REL) used data from the NYS Education Department to conduct two related studies. Among other variables, the studies sought to better understand the pathways by which both new and experienced teachers obtained certification, in what areas, and where they were employed. One REL study was conducted with teachers with less than one-year of experience who began teaching between 2015-2018 found: 

·  While the majority of new teachers earned certificates through the traditional in-state pathway, this varied somewhat by certification area. The proportion of teachers who earned certificates through the individual evaluation pathway was higher for the shortage certification area of career and technical education than for other certification areas.

·       The most frequent certification area for new teachers was in the shortage certification area of special education (40 percent), while the shortage certification areas of career and technical education and bilingual special education were among the least frequent areas (1 percent each).

·       New teachers employed in high-need districts had higher rates of retention in the same district for a second year than did new teachers employed in average and low-need districts

The second related REL study examined how teachers with more than one-year of teaching experience earned additional certificates between 2015-2017. These findings included:

• About 5 percent of experienced teachers in 2015/16 earned additional certificates between October 2015  and October 2017, and these teachers had fewer years of teaching experience (on average 7 years) in New York State public schools than did teachers who did not earn additional certificates during that time (on average 15 years).
• More than half of experienced teachers earned additional certificates through the traditional in-state pathway, while about a third did so through the individual evaluation pathway.
• Special education was the most common shortage certification area in which experienced teachers earned additional certificates (27 percent). 

Obviously, the results from the two REL studies could be used to effectively communicate with current or prospective teachers and NYS teacher preparation programs. Ideally, the results of the referenced REL studies would inform other state policymakers’ work to address statewide shortages. Crucially, the preparation of teacher candidates must become as efficient and effective as possible.  Paraphrasing Covey (1989), in the pursuit of helping to create positive change, we must be effective with people and efficient with time; rather than vice versa. Invitational Education theory and practice, advocates for the utilization of an intentionally caring, optimistic, respectful, and trusting (ICORT) mindset. Through intentional invitations for vibrant discussions and active interactions an ICORT-driven stakeholder within any teacher preparation program would willingly systemically address institutional needs through an inventory of the people, places, policies, programs, and processes (5-Ps) that influence the teacher candidate’s potential for success.

Between the need to develop professional dispositions, the requirements to exhibit content proficiency, and the expected outcome to be “day one ready”, student teaching can be a time of anxiety for the novice.  Does it need to be? The New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE) through its Coalition for Teacher Preparation has done extensive research and pilot testing to prove that the observable presence of 12 Components within a model for teacher preparation programs can optimize the student teacher's potential. Let's examine the NYC Coalition's 12 leading indicators of success:

Rich Clinical Experience

·         Semester-long experience in NYCDOE host school in communities of color, 4-5 days/week

·         Student teaching seminar aligned to student teaching experience 

·         Candidates co-teach and take gradual responsibility for the classroom alongside a Cooperating Teacher who embodies culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogy

Opportunities for Practice and Ongoing Feedback

·         Regular observation by and feedback from Site Coordinator

·         Use of multiple sources of data, e.g. videos, K-12 student perceptions

·         Structured feedback cycles, both formal and informal – driven by the Site Coordinator and Cooperating Teachers, using agreed upon and aligned rubrics, provide candidates actionable, coherent feedback to improve their practice

Practice Based Coursework 

·         Aligns to NYCDOE core pedagogical practices, relevant NYS standards, and NYSED Culturally Responsive-Sustaining Education Framework

·         Encompasses perspectives from communities of color

·         Prepares candidates to be culturally responsive and sustaining educators (in partnership with DOE)

·         Provides high-quality opportunities to practice learning from coursework, e.g. micro-teaching, case-based instruction, simulations, video analysis, and lesson study

Performance Assessment and Gateways

·         Grounded in current NYCDOE evaluation framework, Framework for Teaching

·         Relies on multiple sources of data and includes structured feedback 

·         Occurs regularly each semester

·         Co-scoring of select artifacts to ensure inter-rater reliability

·         Tied to interventions and supports as well as clear exit criteria

Site Coordinator Faculty Position

·         Full-time faculty member with robust, recent, and preferably NYCDOE experience, who serves as partnership liaison

·         Develop and teach methods coursework

·         Conduct student teaching seminar

·         Mentor Cooperating Teachers and teacher candidates

Teacher Educator Professional Learning

·         Actively participate in yearly convenings, engage in regular professional development series with Coalition, and commit to sharing experiences and resources with the broader Coalition

·         Develop and implement formal and informal professional learning that aligns with the Teacher Educator Practices Framework and that supports teacher educators to deepen their understanding of how marginalized communities are impacted by structural inequities

·         Train and calibrate on Danielson Framework for Teaching, NYSED CR-SE Framework, and professionalism/disposition rubric

Teacher Educator Practice

·         Ongoing application of learnings to improve curricula, teaching, and coaching of teacher candidates

·         Focused on surfacing and mitigating implicit biases and integrating CR-SE & racial literacy into coursework

·         Feedback that support teacher educators; to improve their practice and further embody culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogy

Partnership with Schools

·         Student teacher placements at school sites that serve BISOC, students experiencing economic hardship, Students with Disabilities, Multilingual Learners, LGBTQI+, and other students who have been marginalized by systemic inequities

·         Student teacher experiences scheduled around and responsive to the NYCDOE calendar

·         Recruitment, selection, and professional learning support of exceptional Cooperating Teachers

Robust and Diverse Recruitment pipeline

·         University-district partners co-develop strategic teacher recruitment plans, including goals to increase numbers of BIPOC teachers and address district shortage areas

·         Plans contain focused, measurable, and time-bound goals and benchmarks and address equity and inclusion goals

Monitoring Plan

·         Make collective commitment across partners to share data

·         Plan for what data is needed by whom and when to do what 

·         Dictates details of how data is collected, analyzed, and used

·         Build coherence throughout the Shared Governance Structures, anchored in evaluating progress towards full implementation of the 12 Components

Systems to Collect and Analyze Data

·         Identify disproportionate outcomes

·         Use data visualizations and reports to facilitate decision-making

·         Collect and disaggregate data on:

·         Teacher candidates (e.g., student perception survey, NYCDOE teacher evaluation framework)

·         Cooperating Teacher (e.g., TEPF look-fors)

·         Pilot program (e.g., pilot experience survey, stakeholder focus groups, annual progress reporting against Gates O&Is )

·         Sustainable program development (e.g., school employment records, principal survey, teacher educator focus groups, NYCDOE ORD data such as licensure needs and attrition)

Routines for Using Data

·         Governance meetings at least 2x per semester at the school level, at least quarterly at the IHE level, and biannually at the NYCDOE level

·         Communication protocols

·         Data collection analysis and use plans

You and your Professional Learning Community are invited to reflect upon why this model should be effective with the teacher candidate and efficient with stakeholders’ time. Why should this model promote diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.  Why should this model optimize the student teacher’s potential for Day One Readiness?  Compared to your institution’s teacher preparation program, what might be missing?  

 

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (August 31, 2021). Twelve research-based components for an effective

teacher preparation. [Web log post] Retrieved from

 http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

 

References

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning

communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Solution Tree Press.

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2^nd Ed)

            International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:

http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books

 

Explicit Development of Emotional Intelligence Skills to Improve Special Education Teacher Leadership

As a general construct, emotional intelligence encompasses emotional, personal, and social abilities influential upon one’s overall capability to effectively deal with environmental demands and pressures (McCallum & Piper, 2000). Emotional intelligence was further defined by Schutte, Malouff, Bobik, Coston, Greeson, & Jedlicka (2001) as the ability to adaptively recognize, express, regulate, and harness emotions. Diverse cognitive or emotional intelligence skills vary by age, gender, and developmental level (Gardner, 1995), which thereby impacts one’s level of competency or FLOW (Csikszentmihaly, 2013).

Accountability of teacher preparation and graduate leadership programs remain an ongoing process. Both the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP, 2019) and the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP, 2022) provide standards that expect teacher preparation and graduate leadership program curriculum to address leadership skill development. Emotional intelligence has been linked to effective leadership (Goleman, 2002, 2008b). Unfortunately, within too many accredited programs, emotional intelligence behaviors are implicitly presented rather than explicitly taught and thereby reliably assessed. However, a study by Anderson (2017) indicated a direct correlation between a leader’s demonstrated emotional intelligence behaviors in the workplace and stakeholders’ perceptions of optimal school climate,

Outcomes of Anderson’s (2017) research noted 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.  Furthermore, would such schools be more likely to then be perceived as intentionally inviting, having students with higher socio-emotional skills, or have comparatively more diverse learners receiving education in an inclusive setting?  These questions invite further research on the impact of typically demonstrated emotional intelligence and effective teacher leadership within special education settings.

 A study by Byron (2001) found institutes of higher education (IHE) that focus upon emotional intelligence behaviors produced successful outcomes. However, Cobb and Meyer (2000) cautioned that any program seeking to develop emotional intelligence skills “should be empirically defensible, measurable, and clear enough to serve as a basis for curriculum development" (18).  For instance, Sanders’ (2010) quantitative study examined the perceptions of professors that focus upon educational leadership in their work within IHE. Specifically, Sanders sought to identify the professors’ understanding of competencies related to emotional intelligence and the extent to which these competencies were being included within their IHE teacher leadership programs. Left unanswered was whether or to what extent the teacher leaders’ demonstrated emotional intelligence related to stakeholders’ perceptions of optimal school climate

Given teaching is considered one of the most stressful occupations (Palomera, Fernandez-Berrocal, & Brackett, 2008), increasing the importance of emotional intelligence skills training is crucial because professional development in emotional intelligence skills can support teachers’ coping skills within a stressful environment. Teacher burnout becomes more predictable in relation to stress. By contrast, teachers exhibiting high emotional intelligence use more positive, well-adapted, coping strategies to deal with different sources of stress at school, thereby feeling greater job satisfaction (Palomera et al., 2008).

Teacher leadership can be present in different forms for varied purposes, including management, instruction, and school reform. Teacher leadership may be structured either formally or informally as it evolves through presented opportunities and explicit needs within schools. Leadership advancing Invitational Education (IE) theory encourages people to tap into their unlimited potential (Purkey & Novak, 2016). Based on her meta-analysis, Billingsley (2007) found support in the literature for the expectation that serving the needs of students with disabilities requires multiple layers of leadership across school-wide and district-wide levels. Therefore, it makes sense that an intentionally inviting leader’s increased ability to effectively interact with diverse stakeholders would mitigate barriers that confront teacher leaders and their ability to support diverse learners.

To leverage the social, structural, and fiscal, resources beneficial for students with disabilities York-Barr, Sommerness, Duke, and Ghere (2005) suggested teacher leaders should provide the vision, direction, and plans for special education and encouraged prospective teacher leaders to collaborate and advocate across multiple levels within their educational systems.  As a result, prospective teacher leaders would learn to project a concrete understanding of the correlation between the degree to which they are connected to stakeholders within the school and the degree to which they can influence diverse learners’ ability to be connected, feel supported, and optimally succeed within the culture of that school.

Through their educator and leadership preparation programs, every IHE can benefit from encouraging teaching practices that require increased competence in emotional awareness as well as cognition. The results of a study by Rojas (2012) asserted three needs for optimal emotional intelligence development among prospective teachers:

1.  Development of emotional intelligence begins with a commitment to change.
2. Application of emotional intelligence learning is optimized within environments favorable to emotional intelligence development.
3. Pursuit of an ideal allows interdependent application of all other emotional intelligence competencies.

Within the context of emotional intelligence, at least two perspectives are possible: maximal emotional intelligence performance and typical emotional intelligence performance (Gignac, 2010). Typical performance is a more reliable indicator of actual behavior (Sackett, Zadeck & Fogli, 1988). Gignac (2010) and Palmer, Stough, Harmer & Gignac (2009) suggest typical emotional intelligence is purely relevant to the actual demonstration of emotional intelligence skills. Therefore, typical emotional intelligence performance perspective grounds the Genos Emotional Intelligence inventories (Palmer et al., 2009).

Five factors that can be influenced by every leader’s demonstrated emotional intelligence provide a specific framework that contributes to school success or failure. The five powerful factors: People, places, policies, programs, and processes (the Five P’s) become highly significant due to their separate and combined influence (Purkey & Siegel, 2013). Interdependently, the Five P’s provide limitless opportunities for evaluation and development of organizational climate. Grounded in Invitational Education theory, the Five P’s “address the total culture or ecosystem of almost any organization” (Purkey & Siegel, 2003, p. 104). Therefore, the Five P’s contribute to the creation of a positive school climate and ultimately a healthy and successful organization (Purkey & Siegel, 2013).

As noted above, various elements produce an effective educational leader. Clearly, emotional intelligence competencies have been correlated with leadership potential (Charbonneau & Nicol, 2002; Dries & Pepermans, 2007). Yet, further examination of the relationship between emotional intelligence and effective educational leadership remains an ongoing need. Increased understanding of emotional intelligence as a concept and development of participants' emotional intelligence will further enhance any IHE’s leadership development programs (Sadri, 2012).

The field of education would benefit from further understanding the correlation between themes such as emotional intelligence, perception of school climate, and effective leadership capable of monitoring and adjusting indicators of success that optimize and sustain educational reform. The awareness and management of emotions, as well as perception of emotions by others, provide critical elements for success as a leader (Cherniss, 2010). Ideally, this article positively influenced your acceptance that our constantly and rapidly evolving society, will benefit from resilient leaders that possess and demonstrate high levels of emotional intelligence.  Therefore, you are intentionally invited to become an advocate for explicit development of emotional development skills as part of every IHE’s teacher preparation and graduate leadership programs.

 

 

To Cite:

Anderson, C. J. (July 30, 2022). Explicit development of emotional intelligence skills to improve special education teacher leadership. [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.

 

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

 

Byron, C. M. (2001). The effects of emotional knowledge education in the training of             novice teachers. (Order No. 3014883, Columbia University Teachers College). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 103-103 p. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/251642822?accountid=7374. (251642822).

 Charbonneau, D., & Nicol, A. M. (2002). Emotional intelligence and leadership in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1101–1113 doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00216-1

 Cherniss, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence: Toward clarification of a concept. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 110–126. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01231

 Cobb, C.D., & Mayer, J.D. (2000). Emotional Intelligence: What the research says. Educational Leadership. 58(3). 14-18. Retrieved from: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov00/vol58/num03/toc.aspx

Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (2019). CAEP Accreditation Standards.           Retrieved from http://caepnet.org/accreditation/caep-accreditation/spa-standards-and-report-forms

 

Csikszentmihaly, M. (2013). Creativity: The psychology of discovery and invention (Reprint edition.). New York: Harper Perennial. ISBN 9780062283252.

 

Dries, N., & Pepermans, R. (2007). Using emotional intelligence to identify high potential: A metacompetency perspective. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28(8), 749–770. doi:10.1108/01437730710835470

 

Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences: Myths and messages. Phi

            Delta Kappan. 4. 200- 209. Retrieved from:

https://learnweb.harvard.edu/WIDE/courses/files/Reflections.pdf

 

Gignac, G. E. (2010). Seven-Factor model of emotional intelligence as measured by

            Genos EI: A confirmatory factor analytic investigation based on self- and rater-

            report data. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26(4), 309-316

doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000041

 

Goleman, D. (2006a). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.

 

Goleman, D. (2006b). The socially intelligent leader. Educational Leadership, 64(1), 76–

            81. Retrieved from: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept06/vol64/num01/toc.aspx

 

McCallum, M., & Piper, W. (2000). Psychological mindedness and emotional

            intelligence. In R.Bar-On & J. Parker (Ed.), The Handbook of Emotional

            Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home,

            School, and in the Workplace (pp. 118-135). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.  ISBN:   0-7879-4984-1

 

Palmer, B. R., Stough, C., Harmer, R., & Gignac, G. E. (2009). The Genos Emotional

            Intelligence Inventory: A measure designed specifically for the workplace. In C.

            Stough, D. Saklofske, & J. Parker (Ed.), Assessing emotional intelligence:

            Theory, research & applications (pp. 103-118). New York: Springer. doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_6

 

Palomera, R., Fernandez-Berrocal, P., & Brackett, M. A. (2008). Emotional intelligence

            as a basic competency in pre-service teacher training: some 135 evidence.

            Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 6(2), 437-454.

            Retrieved from: http://www.investigacion-            psicopedagogica.org/revista/articulos/15/english/Art_15_276.pdf

 

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J.M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education (2^nd ed). The International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from: https://www.invitationaleducation.net/product-category/books/

Rojas, M. (2012). The missing link: Emotional intelligence in teacher preparation. (Order

No. 3495309, Arizona State University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 220.

Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/923616326?accountid=7374.

(923616326).

 

Sackett, P. R., Zedeck, S., & Fogli, L. (1988). Relations between measures of typical and

maximum job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 482–486.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.482

 

Sadri, G. (2012). Emotional intelligence and leadership development. Public Personnel

 Management, 41(3), 535-548. doi.org/10.1177/009102601204100308

 

Sanders, S.C. (2010) Emotional intelligence, a necessary component of educational

            leadership programs, as perceived by professors of educational leadership

            (Doctoral Dissertation).

Schutte, N.S., Malouff, J.M., Bobik, C., Coston, T.D., Greeson, C., Jedlicka, C., et al.

            (2001). Emotional intelligence and interpersonal relations. Journal of Social

            Psychology, 141(4), 523-536. doi.org/10.1080/00224540109600569

 

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

  

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 (2^nd 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