The purpose of this study was to investigate special educators' preparation far working with paraeducators in collaborative efforts, supervision, and evaluation. Respondents were asked if they had any preservice education to work with paraeducators or instruction from their school system. The majority of the 212 respondents of this survey indicated they are expected to supervise paraeducators but had no preservice education or inservice from their school system. Ninety percent of the respondents felt teacher-education institutions should educate preservice educators and indicated topics that should be covered. The results of two open-ended questions that asked special educators their greatest challenges and benefits of working with paraeducators were also compiled. Implications for future research and implications for school districts and teacher-education institutions are discussed.

A survey was conducted to determine the instructional strategies used by special education teachers and general educators in teaching reading and writing, their philosophical approach (direct instruction or whole language), and what influenced teachers in making their philosophical decision. a 21-item questionnaire was completed by 183 elementary teachers of second and fifth grades and teachers of students with learning disabilities. the results indicated that the most important factor influencing respondents' philosophical decisions in teaching reading and writing is their teacher training program emphasis. results also indicated that the majority of respondents believe that a combination approach using both direct instruction and whole language is effective. the most commonly used instructional strategies by respondents include journal writing, writers' workshop, tradebooks, sustained silent reading, individualized reading, guided reading, and thematic units.

Four commonly used measures of academic achievement were administered in counterbalanced order to 32 elementary and middle school-aged children enrolled in exceptional education programs for the learning disabled. Measures chosen were the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, KeyMath-R, Test of Written Spelling 2, and the Gray Oral Reading Test-Revised. Analysis suggested corresponding measures of reading, mathematics, and spelling were highly correlated, although in some instances generated significantly different mean standard scores. Implications for practitioners are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract