Abstract
Special education teacher education is a vibrant field and the sustained strength of the field is a testament to its vibrancy. In recent times, the field has been subjected to scrutiny and analyses. We have self-analyzed, as well as have been subjected to analysis from outside. Efforts to gain greater insight into current and future directions for our field can be facilitated via a number of methods (Estcheidt, Curran, & Sawyer, 2012). To a great degree, we must examine what we know, how we know it, and what we must learn to move into the future (Spooner, Algozzine, Wood, & Hicks, 2010). There is no shortage of approaches taken to understand special education teacher education and this should continue, if we are to create a deep knowledge base about the field. Curiosity and a desire to improve practice in part drives this process, but what is examined and how may be influenced by any number of factors. It is not clear that inquiry into the field follows a steady progression, with one line of investigation building on another with near perfect correspondence from one study to the next. Should one method predominate our attempt to reveal functional relationships between the most salient variables? The question is intentionally limited to make the point that clearly it is inappropriate to limit the scope by which we conduct these investigations. Special education teacher education must and should be broad-based, guided by questions anchored in the field where independent scholars see fit.
Our own inquiry into the field of special education teacher preparation began with just such broad thinking. In an attempt to conceptualize special education teacher education, we have used a rather unique framework, with the hope that we might influence others to think broadly as well. We began by considering time as an anchor, contemplating the significance of entering the 21st century and how the passage of time might have influenced changes in the field. Next, we thought about the general development of the field and specifically, what actually develops and how? We also drew from our examination and appreciation for the literature on teacher conceptual change (Torff & Sternberg, 2000). With this reflection as the starting point and using a far-reaching metaphor, we intend to encourage reflection and perhaps subsequent action. We chose a metaphor, as the power of comparison often illuminates understanding of ideas or events that are previously foreign or misunderstood. Our use of metaphor was not bound by the conventional methods of our field, but rather inspired by interdisciplinary perspectives on the past and future of special education teacher education. Interdisciplinary thought is not new and many believe that even the most seemingly diverse fields can benefit from borrowing concepts and ideas from the other (Wilson, 1998).
Once we broadened our thoughts beyond the predominant thoughts within special education teacher education, some interesting concepts materialized. We chose to use the lens of the developmental change process, as analogous to Darwinian evolution of organisms. Further, borrowing a metaphor from the virtual world (vis-à-vis the most recent iterations of evolution discussions), we personified the field of special education teacher education as an avatar or organism. After adopting this line of thought, we quickly identified several parallels to teacher education, imagining the field as an organism, subject to different forces that influence change in one direction or another, similar to an organism that at times struggles and others thrives. This led to this special issue: Special Education Teacher Education in the 21st Century: Evolving Approaches? The opening article (Dukes, Darling, and Doan) describes special education teacher education as an organism and the influences that potentially impact its development and change. This introductory article lays the foundation for the remainder of the issue, recounting past and present developments in the field, then moving on to discuss specific influences on the field, which remain from the past, as well as factors that may have future implications.
For the purposes of this special issue, we were specifically interested in the mechanisms that drive special education teacher education as opposed to broader programmatic considerations. We set out to examine these mechanisms using a detailed analysis. The contributing authors in this issue address (a) professional development and course delivery, (b) field experiences and mentoring induction, and (c) candidate performance assessment. These mechanisms were chosen based on our understanding of the basic components of the field, which have, and will continue to, evolve. We intentionally looked to our past to help define and shape our conceptualization of the field and chose familiar components (mechanisms) with the intent of understanding the evolution of special education teacher education. In addition, we also considered diversity, technology, and teacher quality, all issues that we think fuel the field and have the potential to redefine our field moving into the future. Each of these impacts the mechanisms that each group of authors addressed.
The introductory article (Dukes, Darling, and Doan) provides the foundation for this special issue by guiding readers through the conceptualization of the field as an organism, progressing through evolutionary changes and influenced by selection pressures. In the second article, Vernon-Dotson, Floyd, Dukes, and Darling examine professional development and course delivery. These authors reviewed literature on course delivery and considered the professional development experiences pre-service teachers gain from participation in courses. Field experiences and mentoring has evolved in the last 10 years with some of the most significant changes in the last 5. In the third article, Dieker, Rodriquez, Lignugaris-Kraft, Hynes, and Hughes describe and explain the virtual world of simulated environments, giving insight into how technology now influences field experiences. No narrative about special education teacher education is complete without some discussion of assessment. How do we know what we know? In the fourth article, McCall, Alvarez McHatton, and Shealey review literature on performance assessment and describe pre-service assessment with regard to content knowledge, behavior, collaboration, and dispositions. This final article offers some insight into the progression of the mechanisms that evolved over time and continue to evolve as we move into the 21st century.
The use of metaphor and the specific identification of the mechanisms and the fuels defining, while simultaneously influencing the field, begs to be considered from several perspectives. Thus, we asked additional scholars to reflect on this collection and add commentaries to supplement, perhaps challenge, our conceptualization of this evolutionary process. These contributions speculate on what the core articles in this special issue might contribute to our collective understanding of special education teacher education.
We thank and appreciate each of our contributing authors for taking on this task and our commentators for digesting these works and offering honest scholarly commentary. Finally, we thank Michael Rosenberg and Laurie deBettencourt for initially helping us shape our ideas into a special issue and particularly to Laurie for guiding us in the completion of this special issue.
We are pleased to recognize both faculty and student reviewers who work diligently to ensure quality publications for TESE. Over the past year, seven new faculty reviewers have joined the review board. In addition, doctoral students continue to take an active role in reviewing manuscripts under the guidance of faculty mentors. Thirteen doctoral students and several faculty mentors have worked together to provide quality reviews for the journal. These efforts have made for a strong review board with well-prepared reviewers in the future. We welcome the new reviewers and continue to encourage efforts to mentor doctoral students.
Footnotes
Author Biographies
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
