Abstract
This article describes a statewide online alternative teacher preparation program in early childhood special education. The history and evolution of the program is explained along with the programmatic changes that resulted from working with noncertified teachers with a wide variety of backgrounds in both rural and urban districts. Challenges and solutions for providing coursework and supervision via distance to all areas of a state will be presented.
Keywords
The severe shortage of qualified special educators has resulted in significant growth in programs that provide alternative routes to certification (Humphrey, Wechsler, & Hough, 2008; Rosenberg & Sindelar, 2005; Wasburn-Moses & Rosenberg, 2008). This approach to teacher preparation has generated controversy. Because they are often shorter and require fewer courses than traditional programs, the quality of alternative route programs has been questioned (Laczko-Kerr & Berliner, 2002; McLeskey & Ross, 2004). In addition, because of the great variability across alternative route programs, outcomes (e.g., teacher retention rates, classroom performance, ability to attract culturally and linguistically diverse teachers) vary (Brownell, Hirsch, & Seo, 2004), making it difficult to evaluate alternative routes as an approach to easing the teacher shortage.
Given their proliferation, it is important to ensure that alternative routes produce teachers with the knowledge and skills to be effective special educators. While more research needs to be conducted, characteristics of effective alternate route programs that have been identified include ensuring that Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) engage in meaningful collaboration with the Local Education Agencies (LEAs), partnering with schools that have strong leadership, provide a program of adequate length, providing high-quality course content in a timely sequence (i.e., strategies teachers can implement the next day), conducting classroom supervision, and providing on-site mentor support (Humphrey et al., 2008; Rosenberg & Sindelar, 2005).
In this article, we describe the Early Childhood Alternative Teacher Preparation (ECATP) program that was launched nearly 25 years ago at Utah State University (USU) to address the shortage in state preschool classrooms by producing effective early childhood special educators. We explain the history and evolution of the program; describe the required coursework, delivery methods used to provide statewide access, and collaboration with the LEA; and identify current challenges and potential solutions.
Evolution of ECATP
Multi-University Consortium
The ECATP program evolved from a multi-university consortium developed to meet the needs of rural districts to secure licensed special education preschool teachers. The original program began in 1993 with 1 year of funding from the State Office of Education to develop a program. In 1994, a 3-year personnel preparation grant from the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) was secured. It was a joint venture by faculty from the Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD, Utah’s federally designated University Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities) at USU and the Department of Special Education at the University of Utah. The main purpose was to deliver coursework leading to Utah’s birth to five special education licensure to rural areas throughout the state. It was designed to serve both individuals seeking only certification and those who needed to obtain a bachelor’s degree along with certification. Due to the wide variety and needs of those who enrolled in the program, a full-time advisor was employed to not only guide the teachers through the licensure coursework, but also connect them to any prerequisite or university requirements they could access locally or online. The original program delivered the on-campus preschool licensure coursework via distance technology. When the OSEP funding finished in 1997, the consortium was dissolved; the staff at the CPD at USU decided to continue with delivering the program and received discretionary funding from the State Office of Education.
USU ECATP
Beginning in 2006, the CPD staff worked in conjunction with two other alternative teacher preparation (ATP) programs in the Department of Special Education at USU to offer a licensing track for early childhood professionals. ATP (or alternative route to licensure) is a process by which a person with a bachelor’s degree is awarded teacher certification by completing a set of coursework that is organized differently and usually shorter than a traditional on-campus certification program. The other ATP programs prepared teachers to work with K-12 students with severe or mild/moderate disabilities. The original course offerings were discontinued and the coursework was reorganized to better address the needs of noncertified teachers currently working in a classroom. The ECATP program currently enrolls only individuals who are hired to teach in a preschool classroom in a state school district or charter school who have a bachelor’s degree, but do not hold the appropriate license. The program continues to be partially supported by a grant from the State Board of Education.
Attesting to the demand, the number of teachers enrolling in the program continues to increase. Table 1 shows the numbers of completers and the number of districts served from 2008 (the first for teachers to complete the ECATP program) to the present.
Historical Completers.
First year for completers in Early Childhood Alternative Teacher Preparation program.
During the 5-year period from 2008 to 2013, 53 teachers completed the program and were licensed. An additional 73 teachers were licensed during the 3-year period from 2014 to 2017. This increase is likely due to several factors. In 2015, the Utah legislature approved the High Quality School Readiness (HQSRE) grant to fund additional openings in public and private preschools for students from low income families (HQSRE Grant Program of 2018). The grant application requires programs to describe how they are providing services in inclusive classrooms and meeting the needs of all students. Programs are deemed high quality and then are allowed to recruit eligible students, including students with disabilities. To obtain high-quality status, trained evaluators from the State Board of Education rate each classroom on the Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale (Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 2015). Many districts throughout Utah have applied for these additional funds and as a result are altering their preschool service model to include more typically developing students. This model results in the need for more classrooms to serve the additional students, and because students with disabilities are involved (and often at close to 50% of the students in the classrooms), the need for licensed special education preschool teachers has increased. Another contributing factor is that Utah has one of the highest birth rates in the country (Utah Department of Health, n.d.), so there are many preschoolers who may potentially be eligible for special education services.
ECATP Admission Requirements
To be eligible to apply to the ECATP program currently, the teacher must hold a bachelor’s degree and be employed as a preschool special education teacher on a letter of authorization (LoA) from the State Board of Education. The LoA allows the individual to be employed as the teacher of record for a period of up to 3 years, during which the individual is required to be enrolled and making progress in a certification program.
In addition to having a bachelor’s degree (in any field) and a preschool teaching position, the applicants are required to pass the Department of Special Education entry tests in writing and math. Both are basic skills tests, with the math concepts represented in the test targeted at the sixth-grade level. In general, the math exam is the most challenging for applicants, so a practice test is available online to help them review the types of problems contained in the test. Applicants are allowed two attempts, and many require a second effort to pass. There is an appeal process for a third attempt, and they are required to list the steps they will take (e.g., work with a tutor, take the online practice test several times) to ensure they will pass on this last attempt. The program hasn’t required proof that these activities were completed; the performance on the test is all that matters. Throughout the years of the program, these tests have functioned as relatively good screeners for those teachers who will be successful in the ECATP program; the teachers who have required a third attempt often struggle in the program and are more likely to withdraw than those who passed on a first attempt. The alternative programs at USU continue to include this screening step to help ensure teacher success.
ECATP Coursework and Schedule
The training program consists of 13 didactic and practicum courses totaling 25 credit hours. The coursework and practicum are aligned with the Council for Exceptional Children’s Division for Early Childhood Standards for Professionals Working with Young Children and their Families (Division for Early Childhood, 2014) and cross-referenced with the state Effective Teaching Standards (Utah Education Network, n.d.). The ECATP curriculum focuses on experiences for young children with literacy and numeracy, effective practices in behavioral supports for young children, and improving child outcomes by improving teacher effectiveness. Table 2 lists the course scope and sequence. Because many of these teachers are teaching in inclusive classrooms, practice in collaboration and coaching strategies is also included. Specific course content includes language development, early childhood development, foundations in early childhood special education, and a variety of evidence-based strategies for instruction and assessment. The teachers enroll in practicum credit each semester and USU faculty observe their instruction and provide performance feedback at least 3 times per semester throughout the program.
Scope and Sequence of Early Childhood Alternative Teacher Preparation (ECATP) Coursework.
The ECATP courses are organized in a different manner than typical on-campus undergraduate courses. Because many of the teachers may have had no experience in a preschool classroom and/or a classroom that includes children with disabilities, content is presented in a sequence designed to best support teachers in the day-to-day managing of their classroom from Day 1. To prepare for the beginning of school, they attend an orientation seminar the last week of July on the USU campus that addresses organization of the classroom environment, basic classroom management strategies, data collection procedures, naturalistic intervention strategies, and special education requirements covering referral to placement procedures. Teachers are also oriented to Canvas, the IHE learning management system and the idiosyncrasies of using Canvas for engaging in web-based synchronous classes (described below), accessing course materials, and submitting assignments. The teachers leave the workshop ready to set up their classrooms and begin the first day of school with their students. Because all the teachers are traveling to Logan from throughout the state, the program coordinator connects the teachers who ask to share hotel or travel expenses. To decrease the cost for the teachers, they complete several online modules on the content and then are only required to spend two nights and three days in Logan. Throughout fall semester classes, the concepts introduced during the orientation are further developed and teachers practice the range of intervention strategies, from naturalistic to more intensive. Course content is presented in the synchronous class sessions and applied assignments are designed to ensure that the teachers display the skills identified in the Division for Early Childhood professional competencies (Division for Early Childhood, 2014).
Courses are offered in the evenings, as all enrolled are teaching during the day. First year classes are on Monday and Tuesday evenings and second year classes are offered on Wednesday and Thursday. The teachers enroll in three to seven credits per semester for five semesters, including the summer semester between Year 1 and Year 2. The classes are scheduled in the evenings which is a time of day that typically has high Internet use so the teachers interact only with microphones; use of cameras for each would require too much bandwidth and slow delivery to all. Because teachers are spread throughout the state, there is a variety of Internet providers and speeds available in the different locations, which can be especially difficult for some in the more rural areas. Verbal participation points are awarded each week to reinforce active involvement and attempt to maintain attention to the content. All classes are archived and posted for the teachers to access if they are absent or to review for clarification.
Web-Based Synchronous Course Delivery
All courses are delivered via Adobe Connect, a web-based distance technology embedded in Canvas. Teachers may access the classes using their own computers, from anywhere that they have a strong Internet connection. Classes are delivered in a synchronous format, with the instructor and the teachers able to hear each other in real time. Some of the content is presented in online modules prior to the synchronous sessions so that students learn the basic content that they then apply during in-class activities. Participants are encouraged to verbally share in full group lecture/seminar as well as in small group activities, in breakout rooms, and during the synchronous session. The Adobe application has breakout rooms for small group work. The instructor poses a case or problem and teachers are then sent to rooms to interact and solve the case or problem in a group of three or four. The instructor can move in and out of each room to check for questions and to make sure everyone is participating as an instructor would do during an on-site class.
When teachers are first admitted to the program, information about computer specifications and applications required to access the classes is provided to the district coordinator and the teacher. Some districts have assisted the teachers in accessing a computer with the correct applications or have allowed the teachers to participate in the classes from their classrooms. In any case, teachers are aware of the requirement to have access to a computer capable of running the software required for participating in this program and ensuring they have a quiet place with a good Internet connection from where they will attend class. Attending class from their homes is acceptable, as long as they have arranged for a distraction-free environment during class time.
A technology support specialist assists the ECATP students with all technological aspects of the program. Especially in the rural areas, many of these teachers are nontraditional students and may have had limited experience using technology for coursework. Activities such as uploading documents and videos are common requirements in distance courses, but can be challenging for students who are new to distance learning. The technology support specialist also assists teachers in field-testing the Internet connection in their classrooms, as they will use this when the university supervisor conducts live observations via Adobe Connect. In addition to working with the teachers in the program, the technology specialist also supports the adjunct instructors who teach three courses in the program. The adjunct instructors are master’s level current or former special education preschool teachers or related service personnel.
Supervision and Performance Feedback
The ECATP program strives to work collaboratively with the local school districts, especially in supervising the teachers. When teachers are admitted, the local district assigns an instructional coach to the teacher. The coach must hold a license in the area of early childhood special education and must have a minimum of 3 years prior teaching experience with preschool-age children with disabilities. The coach must be available weekly to provide direct supervision and feedback in the teacher’s classroom. The district should compensate the coach US$300 per semester per ECATP teacher for fulfilling the responsibilities of the coach unless these responsibilities are part of the coach’s current job description.
This local coach provides a great deal of support to the teacher. For example, initially, these teachers have had only a basic introduction to the individualized education program (IEP) process and procedures, so the district-assigned coach assists the teacher in conducting eligibility assessment, developing IEPs, and progress monitoring while the teacher is gaining knowledge and skills in these areas. The instructional coach also completes observation forms on the specific practicum assignments prior to the university supervisors’ observation. The program coordinator provides an online orientation to the observation requirements and the forms to complete. The district coach and the university supervisor use identical observation forms for each application assignment. Coaches have an orientation to the definitions of the behaviors on the observation form so they can prepare the teachers to make adjustments to strategies to improve performance on the university observation which results in points toward the course grade. The coach’s observation is shared with the teacher and the ECATP supervisors; the university supervisors use the coach’s observation data during their observation with the teacher and can then discuss improvement. Points are not awarded on the coach’s observations to emphasize the position of the coach as a mentor and support and not a supervisor. This arrangement was a result of a discussion with district coaches several years ago and current coaches have expressed they prefer this role as well.
As mentioned earlier, the teachers in the program are scattered throughout the state. An effort has been made since 2015 to visit the teachers on site at least once during their time in the program, but these observations have mostly occurred for teachers within 200 miles of the USU campus. Because the university supervisors have not been in every classroom, the district coach completes an observation form on the classroom environment (e.g., rules posted, areas well defined, materials accessible) and checks weekly lesson plans and general behavior management strategies. The university supervisor only follows with feedback on the environment and scheduling if aspects of these show up in other observations.
Other than one possible on-site visit, all university observations are completed online through Adobe Connect. The teachers receive at least three observations per semester from a university supervisor. There are several applications available to view the teachers live in their classrooms or to allow them to upload recordings the supervisor can view asynchronously. If teachers do not have permission to videotape students in their classrooms, permission forms are sent from the program. All recordings are stored on a protected site and are not shared with anyone but the student and the university supervisor. To collect examples of intervention strategies to share with teachers in the program, supervisors have gained specific permission from parents in different classrooms to share the video example of their children’s teacher working with an individual or large group. Exceptional examples of teaching are noted during university supervisor observations of course assignments. The program director then has a discussion with the teacher if she or he would be comfortable to have this observation used as an example to share with future teachers in the program. If the teacher is comfortable, then a permission form with the necessary description about how the recording will be used and how and where it will be available is sent to all parents of students in the class. When forms are all returned to the program, the example is shared to assist new teachers with the same assignment.
LEA Collaboration
An advisory board of special education district directors or preschool coordinators, State Board of Education personnel, and the coordinator and staff of the ECATP program collaborate in the development and delivery of the program. This collaboration is unique to USU’s ATP programs and is critical to the success of teachers enrolled in the program. For the most recent funding cycle, the State Board of Education has required that each funded program convene at least quarterly advisory board meetings with the State Board of Education and the local education agencies; in previous grant cycles, the requirements stated only to collaborate with the local districts. The current proposal explains that these meetings are to ensure that the personnel preparation is aligned with the needs of the local school district. Each district director signs the Informed Understanding of Participating Local Education Agency agreement, which includes requirements for the teacher in training and the coach to meet as often as weekly. The district is responsible for ensuring the coach has time allocated to meet with the teacher and must compensate the coach, unless it is part of the coach’s district role. The Advisory board meets 4 times a year online via Adobe Connect. Agendas are sent in advance with discussion items proposed by the program coordinator or by local district representatives. The meetings are archived for those unable to attend and the agenda with notes and the URL for the archived recording are sent to all members. The main purpose of the Advisory Board meetings is to strengthen the communication between the district coordinators and the ECATP coordinator. Assignments are discussed, current needs and future initiatives in districts are shared, and adjustments are made to the content emphasized in the program.
Challenges and Potential Solutions
A significant challenge is that, due to lack of qualified candidates for teaching positions especially in rural areas, districts often hire individuals with no background in either education or working with individuals with disabilities. They interview for openings in their classrooms and then, of the applicants with bachelor’s degrees, hire the best available candidate. Many of the teachers who have enrolled in the program have degrees in related fields such as elementary education, family and human development, or early childhood studies; however, teachers have enrolled from fields such as business, accounting, biology, and theater. Those with bachelor’s degrees from nonrelated fields tend to struggle with organizing and completing the application assignments in the preschool classroom unless they have had prior experience as a paraeducator in a special education classroom.
We encourage districts to hire individuals who have had paraprofessional experience, but in the rural areas, the pool may be so small that the best available person comes to the preschool classroom with no relevant prior experience. These teachers require additional coaching support from the district and the ECATP staff to be successful. If it is a rural district, the coach may already be wearing several hats, resulting in limited time to support the teacher. In more than one instance since 2013, the preschool coach for the ECATP teacher has either been a special educator, but not a preschool teacher, or has come from a nearby district as there was no one available in the ATP teacher’s district. The ECATP coordinator has attempted in the last few years to establish a pool of retired or part-time special education preschool teachers who could act as coaches but has had little success in recruiting these professionals. If a statewide group of coaches was available to provide the coaching over technology, this would provide a solution especially to help support those teachers in districts with limited preschool mentors as in the smaller rural districts. In these cases, USU supervisors complete additional observations.
The variety of teachers’ backgrounds mentioned above also presents issues in delivering the content in a range from basic introduction to expanding skills in those who already have the basic foundation, while ensuring that all teachers have the essential skills they need to be successful in their classrooms. To better fit the needs for those teachers who have worked as paraeducators for several years in a preschool classroom or have a related degree (e.g., K-12 special education), courses could be adapted to present competencies in a variety of ways, both synchronously and asynchronously. Presenting some content asynchronously in a self-paced module would allow those who have significant prior knowledge and skills to complete those modules more quickly, while providing additional time and instructor support for those who may need longer to master the content. The ATP programs are in the process of creating such modules to provide a more individualized delivery that will better serve the range of knowledge and skills represented in the cohorts.
As with many teacher preparation programs, funding continues to be a challenge for the ECATP program. USU is the land grant university for the state and programs attempt to deliver coursework throughout the state, but there is no specific line item available to support this program within the Department of Special Education funds. The State Board of Education has made funding available to meet the critical need in the state for certified teachers, but as the state budget continues to be stretched thinner, it is less likely that sufficient funding will be provided in the future. Federal personnel preparation grants have also been decreasing, so avenues for future funding and program delivery will need to be explored. One approach is to identify course content, such as IEP processes, instructional design, and basic behavior management, that is consistent across ATP programs and provide it to all special education areas (i.e., early childhood, severe, and mild/moderate) asynchronously and use synchronous class sessions for application with specific student populations. This approach, which is used in synchronous classes on campus, decreases the number of faculty required to teach courses. One drawback is that course sizes are larger, which requires more instructor time for grading and responding to students, so all these demands need to be balanced.
The need to meet the current demand for qualified teachers in preschool Special Education in many states throughout the country has fueled the growth of ATP programs. This article presented the development and evolution of the ECATP program at USU. Specific issues of offering coursework via distance throughout a large rural state along with maintaining attention to delivering high-quality coursework and supervision were discussed. The ECATP program at USU will strive to continue to train highly qualified teachers while preserving the rigor of a high-quality preparation program. This will require exploring new avenues of funding and delivery to provide effective preparation programs as efficiently as possible.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The ECATP program is supported in part by a grant from the Utah State Board of Education.