Using a Classification System to Probe the Meaning of Dual Licensure in General and Special Education

Abstract

The alignment of the teacher quality provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the transparency of low achievement of students who have disabilities under the testing mandates of NCLB have converged to create substantial renewed interest and activity in collaborative programs of teacher education—a term used to describe program redesign that brings together teacher preparation for general and special education to improve education not only for students who have disabilities but also for all students who struggle. Such preservice efforts (often referred to as “dual certification” or “dual licensure”) are not only proliferating at a rapid pace, they are proceeding in the absence of analytic frameworks to consider collaborative teacher education more critically, to create a common discourse around this trend, to capture variations in collaborative teacher education, to clarify its multiple meanings, and to uncover assumptions under which such program development is taking place. The purpose of this article is to provide a conceptual framework to simultaneously make sense of and problematize the landscape of collaborative teacher education, based on a classification system of program models.

Analysis of Stakeholder Perceptions of a Clinical Model Involving Co-Teaching and Extended-Field Experiences in an Inclusive Middle-Grades Setting

“…They found that working with duallyprepared teacher candidates led to more differentiation and small group instruction than if they had continued their work in isolation. Blanton and Pugach (2011) predicted the impact of teacher candidates who have special training in inclusive practices.…”

Exploration and Practice on Course Teaching in Plastic Injection Mold

“…(2011) applied the dual system from German in the teaching process, allowing the cultivation of skilled talents to be shared by enterprises and schools [7]. The potential of applying this mode to Asia was demonstrated by Stefan [8].…”

“…These reform measures are teacher-centered and curriculum-oriented, making them conducive to exploiting the role of teachers. However, the theoretical value of the mode is more than its practical value, separating theories from practice, which is not conducive to the cultivation of (2011) applied the dual system from German in the teaching process, allowing the cultivation of skilled talents to be shared by enterprises and schools [7]. The potential of applying this mode to Asia was demonstrated by Stefan [8].…”

The Erosion of FAPE for Students with LD

“…As a field, special educators have spent quite a bit of time discussing and researching how to improve teacher preparation both to (a) better prepare special education teachers for the demands of providing instruction in inclusive content‐area classes, and (b) meet federal criteria for “highly qualified” teachers that was included in legislation for the first time at the turn of the century (e.g., No Child Left Behind Act, ; IDEA, ). Many teacher preparation programs moved to a non‐categorical special education focus, or to collaborative models that result in dual certification in both early childhood, elementary education, or a content‐area (e.g., math, science) and special education pedagogy (Blanton & Pugach, ). The nature and structure of these training programs can look very different from institution to institution; but to make room for additional coursework in content, programs commonly collapsed or eliminated courses related to characteristics of disability.…”