Paraeducator Perspectives: Factors that

Help or Hinder their Effectiveness

Ritu V. Chopra, Ph.D.Executive Director & Assistant Research Professor

The PAR²A Center1380 Lawrence St. Suite 650, Denver, Colorado 80204-2076

(303) 556-6451ritu.chopra@cudenver.edu

www.paracenter.org

Session Overview

Paraeducator Effectiveness Study: large scale study had several components

Primary focus of this session: share findings from only one component i.e. focus group discussions with special education paraeducators

Paraeducator Effectiveness StudyThis research explores the hypothesis that paraeducators affect student achievement

It documents the use of research-based methods and techniques among paras in Colorado who have taken CO-TOP (Comprehensive Training Opportunities for Paraeducators) training and those who have not.

The study also considers the context in which the paraeducators work.

Mixed Methods Design Paraeducator Effectiveness Study

Teachers

•LoU Interview

•Supervising Teacher•Assessment of

•Paraeducator Skills

•Demographic •Information

Paraeducators•They do their jobs •We observe while

they work

•Complete a Self-Report Form

•Demographic Information

•Focus Groups

Student Achievement

ACES –Academic

CompetencyEvaluation

Scales

Findings: Teacher Interviews

The facts: 56.8% of paraeducators were supervised by

teachers with no preparation to superviseOf these, 61.1% received little to no supervision

Only 43.2% of paraeducators were supervised by teachers with some preparation to supervise

Of these, only 63.4% actually received

Our Conclusions: Paraeducators who work with teachers with no

training receive very little supervision – work almost entirely independently

Even teachers who are trained to supervise don’t always use what they know

Some Preliminary Findings: Paraeducator Observation Field

NotesParaeducators: Provide individualized attention to students

who need that attention, sensitive, loving care of students who need it

Most paraeducators are using tried and true instructional methods

Some are not

Some paraeducators are doing the things for which paraeducators are most criticized – hovering, separating kids from their peers, relieving classroom teachers of responsibility for students with disabilities…

Fortunately, many are not

More Preliminary Findings: Paraeducator Observation Field

NotesParaeducators: Sometimes are assigned to do things that are

certainly within their scopes of responsibility but repetitive and boring with little relief

Some have to work with NO SUPERVISION AT ALL

When general ed teachers engage with special ed students in inclusive classrooms, paraeducators don’t “hover”

Some paraeducators support a student to participate in a general ed class as actively as possible

Some are not involving other students or helping students engage with typical peers

More Preliminary Findings: Paraeducator Observation Field

Notes

Paraeducators (in general):

Often are making up their roles as they go along in the absence of good direction

Often don’t know where they fit

Often “go with the flow” – trying to follow the lead of the teacher

Have few chances to meet with teachers

Get little guidance as to how to teach the lesson they are teaching

Have to make up what they are doing on the fly

More Preliminary Findings: What Teachers Do Makes THE Difference

Special Ed Teachers (in general):

Fail to give the right information about student needs to the paraeducator

Fail to meet with paraeducators

Always have time to meet with outsiders (us) who come for a research study, but do not have time to meet with or plan for paraeducators

Do not have much of a handle on what students with special needs should be getting out of the general ed curriculum or appropriate adaptations for students

Do not know whether their students are progressing while working with paraeducators

Focus groups with Paraeducators

Paraeducator Effectiveness Study: large scale study had several components

Primary focus of this session: to share findings from only one component i.e. focus group discussions with paraeducators.

Purpose of the focus group discussions was to seek paraeducator perspectives on factors that enhance or impede their

performance.

Focus Group Questions1. How did you learn to do your job ( referring to the

form they filled out about themselves when they were observed)

2. What factors are associated with your ability to use the methods, techniques and skills that are listed on this form that you completed as part of the study?

3. What obstacles have you encountered as you’ve tried to use the methods, techniques and skills that are listed on this form?

4. Why have you stayed in your job?

5. What would you like changed about your job?

6. What further training (if any) would you like to have?

Q1.How did you learn your job?

By watching other paras were and learning from them

Having a child with special needs

Maternal instinct

Learning by watching special education teachers – “good supervisors”, coaching and feedback

Self Education

Being their own advocate and asking questions

Formal Training, e.g. classes (CO-TOP) & other

Q2: Factors are associated application of methods,

techniques & skills

Teacher support – coaching feedback, positive environment

Access to IEP goals- (attendance at IEP meetings)

Meetings with teachers and related service providers

Written plans

Parent demands/upport/follow-up

Collaboration, Solidarity, mutual respect among team members

Q3: Obstacles to application of methods, techniques & skills

Lack of respect for paraeducators and their opinion - math academy example

Teacher delegates menial jobs such as diapers/ personal care etc.

Teacher threatened by a paraeducators who is very good

Lack of knowledge about legalities, special education students, IEPS what the child needs sped.

Unwillingness of the General ed. teachers to support paras and sped students

Lack of Communication between teachers

Delegation of tasks paraeducators have no training or the legal responsibility – medical procedures, modifications

Burn out with difficult students

“The biggest obstacle is the Regular education teachers”

“The biggest obstacle is the Regular education teachers. The teachers are so focused on CSAP. They concentrate on the students who have potential and see the parents/paras as responsible for the students who have difficulties.”

“Some teachers do not seem to have good knowledge of how to work with SPED students.”

“Some teachers don’t want to have anything to do with the process of modifying for that student. we have battled with the English Dept. on modification for kids. I take things home to work on it and modify it. They don’t seem to care that it is the law and that they are supposed to follow the IEP.”

Note: Modification of curriculum is not Para responsibility

Q4:Why have you stayed in your job?

Love for children- value relationships with children

Helping children – “guiding them in the right direction”; “feels good to help”; “Making a difference” “nurturing and giving them the love”

Supervisor is respectful, “treats me like an equal”, “doesn’t act like she is better than you.”

Aspiring to be a teacher

Works with own kids’ schedule

“I have a son who has disabilities and got into this because of the SPED supervisor through my son. I get to help these other kids and I get to help my son as well.”

Q5: What would you like changed about your job? More respect for the student with disabilities More respect for paraeducator role More teachers who do their jobs well More support from teachers Training for general classroom teachers - dealing

with students with disabilities

“Teachers more accepting of SPED students and everyone feels responsible for their learning. Also that they are willing to hear information from me as well. Some of the new teachers have more background in SPED and are more understanding, but some of the older teachers will not listen as well and take other opinions in to account.”

Q5: What would you like changed about your job?

Clear roles - who is supposed to do what - paraeducators, general ed. and the special education teacher

Teacher prepared to delegate

Teacher’s clear about their expectations of the pars and the students

Better communication between the teachers

More money!

“Teacher has things ready and knows what they are looking for you to work on with student and knows what the student is capable of doing”

Q6: What further training would you like to have?

Whole team train together - go through the same thing at the same time

Specific techniques demonstrated with the students you work with

Get paid for training

Implications for Decisions about Training

Special ed teachers STILL don’t have a good grasp on their role as consulting teachers with general ed

Then, when paraeducators are added to the picture, the flaws in the relationship between general and special ed are more evident

Teacher preparation programs have : many requirements – many areas of

expertise to cover limited time / credit hours to prepare

future teachers, faculty without much understanding of the

supervisory – team membership – team leadership issues faced by special ed teachers.

Implications for Decisions about Training

Inservice – District-Based Training is expensive. Is it worth it…

For teachers who supervise paraeducators?For paraeducators who serve students who:

• need learning strategy instruction? • remedial literacy or math instruction? • visual supports or language support?• require behavioral supports?• instruction in social skills?

Our conclusion: Yes, but the first focus should be on teachers and training should focus on the relationships between teachers first, and the supervision of the paraeducator secondarily.