The roles and obligations of teacher educators have expanded substantially in recent years. Expectations have increased because of national concerns about the overall achievement results of all students and because of specific federal mandates-expressed in reauthorizations of the No Child Left Behind Act and the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004-about students with disabilities and their access to the general education curriculum and their increased, successful participation in inclusive educational settings. Complicated by the chronic and persistent shortage of special educators and the imperative that general educators have increased skills to address the needs of all struggling learners, demands on special education college and university faculty have magnified. However, the nation continues to face a shortage of faculty who can generate new knowledge about effective practices, translate such research findings into teacher preparation programs' curriculum, and prepare a sufficient supply of new and highly skilled teachers. In this article, the authors discuss the current policy landscape, connections between the shortage of teachers and the shortage of special education faculty, and the role of the federal government in addressing these shortages. They conclude with a call for national dialogue-necessary so that the continuing cycle of faculty shortages and resulting shortages of those who directly serve students with disabilities may finally be resolved.Keywords special education faculty shortage, supply and demand of highly qualified teachers, higher education policy, federal role in leadership (doctoral) preparationThe connection between teacher educators working in colleges and universities and education professionals working in school settings is clear, although often underestimated. Most practitioners receive their training from college faculty, either through traditional undergraduate and graduate degree programs or through university-based nontraditional

Understanding the context of the demand for special education (SE) teacher education (TE) faculty is important because it can provide faculty at doctoral-granting universities with useful information for program planning. Knowing more about SE teacher preparation programs currently in place and program revisions being planned allows doctoral programs to be more responsive to their consumers. Doctoral students seeking careers in academe will be better able to prepare for the jobs they fill in the future. With this intent in mind, in fall of 2009, the Special Education Faculty Needs Assessment (SEFNA) surveyed a sample of SE TE coordinators. The survey requested information about past, present, and future concentrations or programmatic offerings. It also asked questions about projected need for new faculty resulting from attrition, program expansion, and expanded faculty roles. In addition, the survey gathered information about current staffing patterns at these college and university preparation programs. A two-phased, nonprobability, purposeful sampling approach was employed. Programs in small and large states were sampled, and the survey obtained a 78.1% response rate ( n = 57). Results indicate that SE teacher preparation programs are not closing. Rather, the roles of SE faculty and the programs they offer will expand greatly in the upcoming 5 years. This expansion is expected at a time of significant attrition, some 21% annually due to retirements alone, making it clear that demand for new faculty will far outstrip the supply in the next few years.

Three studies are described in this article. Each is focused on a different aspect of the long-standing initiative that supports special education doctoral students. This initiative is one of the discretionary programs of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act that is managed by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). Study 1 sought to determine the graduation rate of OSEP-supported special education doctoral students. Study 2 analyzed funding patterns provided to these doctoral students. Study 3 used data from the first two studies to make comparisons with information provided by other federal agencies that provide funding for students’ pursuit of doctorates across many disciplines. From the authors’ findings, they conclude that OSEP’s projects are critical to the nation’s capacity to produce a sufficient supply of special education doctorates, who in turn produce a sufficient supply of general and special educators who can be effective in inclusive educational settings. This article includes key findings from each study, provides overarching conclusions about how the specific funding and support packages might be modified, and suggests a process to use when making adjustments to these projects’ and doctoral students’ award levels.

The shortage of trained professionals in special education has given rise to varied initiatives in the area of personnel preparation. Increasingly, alternative certification programs are being considered as an option by state departments of education. Under the auspices of the Council for Learning Disabilities' Standards and Etlgics Committee, a survey was conducted of all states concerning the use of such programs to train teachers of students with disabilities. A total of 50 states (and the District of Columbia) were contacted with 51 responses received, for a 100% return rate. Over 76% of all states had alternative certification programs, with the majority having them available across early childhood, middle, and secondary education.Over 62% indicated that such programs addressed the needs of students with disabilities. A total of 24 states offered alternative cert fication programs for special education teachers in general, with a like number for learning disabilities teachers specifically. A discussion focusing on some of the issues related to alternative certification programs for the field of special education is provided.

No abstract