“Bringing My ‘A Game’”: Exploring the Situated Nature of Special Education Teacher Effectiveness

• In Event: The Special Education Teacher Workforce: New Evidence on Composition, Distribution, and Effectiveness Across Contexts

Abstract

Objectives:
Effective teachers are crucial to students' development (e.g., Chetty et al., 2014; Kraft, 2019). Policymakers often treat effectiveness as an objective measure of instructional practice and student outcomes. Yet, effectiveness is complicated by school contexts (Johnson et al., 2012). Though the contextualization of effectiveness has been addressed in general education (Kraft & Papay, 2014), few studies consider special education teacher (SET) effectiveness as situated in local contexts. We ask:

● How do SETs conceptualize effectiveness?
● How is SETs concept and enactment of effectiveness shaped by their local context?

Perspectives:
We ground this work in the research on the role of working conditions in shaping the effectiveness of the SET workforce (Bettini et al., 2024). SETs’ capacity to effectively fulfill their roles requires careful attention; though policy provides loose guidelines for SETs’ roles (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2004), research indicates SETs’ roles are often ambiguous (Youngs et al., 2011), likely emerging from how their roles are constructed. They typically work across grades and content areas to support access to the general curriculum while simultaneously ensuring progress toward individual goals. Furthermore, in the push toward inclusion (Williamson et al., 2020) and policy initiatives designed to improve how schools support all students, time use studies suggest SETs may not be the individual providing instruction to students with disabilities (SWDs) (e.g., Vannest & Hagan-Burke, 2010). This hazy structure creates space for individual and organizational priorities to guide how SETs take up their roles (e.g., Bray & Russell, 2017; Weiss et al., 2014).

Data:
Data included two interviews with four elementary SETs. All were rated as highly-effective by principals and taught SWDs accessing the general curriculum. Principal interviews, field observations, and focus groups with students served as secondary data sources.

Methods:
In pairs, we coded SET interviews using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022). We constructed thematic maps and case summaries detailing each SET’s concept of effectiveness and then identified the most powerful cross-case working conditions from SETs’ perspectives. Memos drawing on secondary data illuminated how working conditions shaped SETs’ enactment of effectiveness.

Results:
All SETs figured effectiveness as: (1) supporting SWDs and (2) supporting other educators in supporting SWDs. Yet, within this vision, their conceptualization of effectiveness varied. Differences emerged from their individual backgrounds and experiences and the shared cultural narratives about students, teaching, and learning in their school context. All SETs emphasized how working conditions shaped effectiveness. Administrative support was particularly potent, as their principal’s vision came to bear on their identity as effective SETs. Administrative support also informed collegial support, schedules, and access to curricula, bounding SETs’ enactment of effectiveness.

Significance:
In this paper, cross-case findings provide evidence of the complexity of SET effectiveness, where local actors exercise considerable discretion in implementing policy (e.g., Bray & Russell, 2017). This has implications for policies designed to support and sustain special education teachers and provide robust educational opportunities for SWDs, a longstanding policy challenge facing schools (Billingsley et al., 2020).

Authors

• Hannah Morris Mathews, University of Florida

• Elizabeth Grobart, University of Wisconsin - Parkside

• Jennifer Curran, University of Florida

• Gabriella Arfaras, University of Florida