Introduction to AEI’s Special Issue on Special Education Teacher Evaluations

Abstract

The purpose of this introductory article is to provide an overview to the special issue on special education teacher evaluation. This special issue features five articles that collectively present a comprehensive review of the current state of understanding about the issues concerning devising and implementing special education teacher evaluation systems. Within this special issue are articles that provide a discussion of some of the primary challenges associated with evaluating special education teachers; an overview of the issues associated with using observation tools to measure special education teachers; and three studies that each feature a unique approach to special education teacher evaluation via opportunities to learn (My Instructional Learning Opportunities Guidance System; Classroom Observations of Student-Teacher Interactions-Mathematics) and evidence-based instructional practices (Recognizing Effective Special Education Teachers). Because of the current gap in special education teacher evaluation research, we hope that this special issue will contribute to the field, and advance existing research.

Evaluating Preservice Teachers' Performance in a Blended Field Experience Course During the Quarantine of COVID-19

“…The third domain is Instruction, with five components based on proper communication with students: teachers need to (a) create meaningful questions, (b) engage students in in-depth discussions, (c) make lessons engaging by getting students to participate, (d) frequently check students' learning, and finally (e) cater to the needs of the students so they grasp the content. Johnson and Semmelroth (2014) argued that the Danielson Framework has an instructional domain that uses a constructivist approach to teaching and learning. Creating meaningful questions is at the core of effective communication, discussions, and student participation.…”

Improving teacher evaluation outcomes for special educators: what do the ‘gatekeepers’ say?

“…Due to the increased focus on accountability and the realisation that teacher effectiveness is a crucial contributor to student academic outcomes (Johnson and Semmelroth, 2014a;Jones and Brownell, 2014), teacher evaluation and accountability-related policies and discussions continue to receive significant attention in the United States (Bartell et al, 2018;Grissom and Youngs, 2016). All 50 states currently mandate the use of teacher evaluation systems, and several states require measures of student achievement as part of the evaluation process (Close et al, 2018).…”

Establishing Content Validity of the Quality Indicators for Classrooms Serving Students With Autism Spectrum Disorders Instrument

“…As teacher evaluation systems emerged, the field of special education responded with attention focused on the appropriateness of alternative measures including value-added approaches for determining the effectiveness of special education teachers (Buzick & Jones, 2015; Kearns, Kleinert, Thurlow, Gong, & Quenemoen, 2015; Johnson & Semmelroth, 2014a; Jones & Brownell, 2014; Woolf, 2015). The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC, 2012) released its Position on Special Education Teacher Evaluation which identified five major components of an effective teacher evaluation system for special educators.…”

“…Unfortunately, despite the strong evidence-base for a number of practices for teaching students with ASD, researchers have found many teachers lack preparation and support for the implementation of those EBPs (Belfiore, Fritts, & Herman, 2008; Brock, Huber, Carter, Juarez, & Warren, 2014; Browder & Cooper-Duffy, 2003; National Research Council [NRC], 2001). Project ASD’s Quality Indicators for Classrooms Serving Students With ASD (QIASD) is an observational tool designed specifically to provide special education teachers serving students with ASD with discrete and actionable feedback (Johnson & Semmelroth, 2014a). In this study, we provide content validation for the 52 quality indicators assessed by the QIASD.…”