Alternative Teacher Preparation Programs: Examination Through a Marketing Lens

Abstract

This investigation used the 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix (i.e., product, price, place, promotion, people, physical evidence, and processes) to review development and recruitment strategies of special education alternative teacher preparation programs. Articles published between 1997 and 2018 were reviewed to identify alternative teacher preparation programs developed to tackle the chronic teacher shortage in special education across the United States. A total of 17 articles met the inclusion criteria, 10 of which specifically targeted rural areas. Results indicated people (94%), place (94%), and product (88%) were most consistently addressed in program design. However, price (59%) and promotion (41%) were addressed least. Overall, 1,419 teacher candidates were recruited into the 17 special education alternative teacher preparation programs, with 460 recruited from rural areas.

Keywords

recruitment rural special education teacher shortage marketing certification

The Council for Exceptional Children and its division on Teacher Education declared the teacher shortage in special education a national emergency in 1999 (Jordan et al., 1999) and the problem continues to persist today. In the 2015–2016 school year, 48 states and the District of Columbia reported shortages in special education (Sutcher, Darling-Hammond, & Carver-Thomas, 2016). Shortages are even more pronounced in rural areas, where geographic barriers, poverty, and the need to serve a diverse population with less resources compounds the problems of recruitment and retention of new teachers (Bargerhuff, Dunne, & Renick, 2007; Berry, Petrin, Gravelle, & Farmer, 2011; Childre, 2014; Johnson, Humphrey, & Allred, 2009; Sindelar et al., 2018; Sutton, Bausmith, Connor, Pae, & Payne, 2014). As a result, students with disabilities, often those needing more supports, have been the ones most often placed with teachers without experience, preparation, or qualifications (Mason-Williams, 2015).

Alternative Teacher Preparation

As a method to address the persistent shortage, alternative teacher preparation (ATP) programs have been developed to attract and train new special education teachers (Childre, 2014; Esposito & Lal, 2005). From 1987 to 2007, more than 250,000 teachers entered the profession via ATPs. ATP programs have no single definition but have been commonly defined as programs providing opportunities toward preservice preparation that differ from traditional on-campus, face-to-face programs that include uncompensated field work experiences. Although there may be some overlap between traditional and ATP programs, ATP programs are often streamlined and delivered in off-campus locations, accommodating individuals who have already been hired as the teacher of record (Dai, Sindelar, Denslow, Dewey, & Rosenberg, 2007). ATP programs have been designed to attract a wider market of people into the teaching profession, including underrepresented and nontraditional populations, rather than traditional full-time college students. Especially within rural areas, geographic barriers limit access to postsecondary education, thereby justifying the need for alternative programs which are delivered in off-campus settings (Sindelar et al., 2018). The development of ATP programs also has been used to address different needs, such as allowing school personnel to pursue their credential while on the job or to fast track the certification process for unendorsed teachers (Dai et al., 2007).

With decreasing enrollment in traditional teacher preparation programs, there has been an increase in the number of ATP programs developed over the past two decades, especially within urban and rural areas (Rosenberg & Sindelar, 2005). The high cost of ATP development and delivery places greater importance on evaluating efforts relative to program return on investment (ROI; Sindelar et al., 2012). Current research has not analyzed efforts in recruitment in relation to ATP results as measured by the number of applicants and candidates enrolled and pursuing training in ATP programs. Instead of continually developing new targeted preparation programs as a method for alleviating the teacher shortage, a more effective approach may be the examination of existing programs’ specific marketing elements to determine if efforts were maximized and outcomes were adequate. Use of marketing strategies in the higher education sector should no longer be confined to the expertise within colleges of business.

The need to adopt more business-focused and market-oriented operating modes is becoming essential for all institutes of higher education (IHE; Ivy, 2008; Nicolescu, 2009). As the teacher shortage continues to severely impact our education system, there is a need to analyze what comprehensive efforts have been made to recruit more special education teachers across the United States. In addition, as the solution to the special education teacher shortage continues to be uncertain, an analysis of college of education efforts through a marketing lens is warranted. Unlike most prior reviews regarding ATP development, this review of the literature does not analyze ATPs based on quality or efficacy. Instead, we used the 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix framework, described by Booms and Bitner (1981), to analyze if nontraditional teacher preparation programs included specific efforts through outreach and program development to increase program attractiveness. The seven marketing elements include: (a) product, (b) price, (c) place, (d) promotion, (e) people, (f) physical evidence, and (g) processes (see Table 1). The following three research questions guided this investigation: (a) What ATP programs in the extant literature base have been developed as a result of the special education teacher shortage to recruit people to enter the field as PK-12 special education teachers? (b) Of the programs identified, what elements of the 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix were used to increase program attractiveness to recruit more participants?, and (c) What special considerations are needed for recruiting more candidates into rural ATP programs?

Table 1.

7 P’s Service Marketing Mix Element Definitions and Application to Alternative Teacher Preparation Programs.

Element	Definition	Application to education	Criteria used in review
Product	An object or service an organization produces on a large scale in a specific volume of units	The product is the ATP program designed to recruit new special educators. Includes total credits, program length, and targeted licensure outcomes (by level or by disability). Includes implementation of cohorted design, where program candidates complete entire program as a unit	Must include one of the following: Less credits or shorter program duration Targeted specific licensure outcomesCohorted model
Price	Price the customer pays for a service or product. Price is the most important factor for marketing	Cost of doing the program through tuition stipends or funding opportunities. Funding opportunities are provided for program development and directly to customers	Must provide funding opportunity directly to customer
Place	The location where the product is available for the customers	Method and format of program delivery: traditional face-to-face campus-based programs or distance methods (online or hybrid). Hybrid formats are a blend of face-to-face and online learning opportunities. For field experiences, OJT opportunities allow participants to continue employment in school settings while completing program. Place includes geographic considerations such as urban or rural areas	Must provide more targeted access through one of the following: Uses distance or hybrid options Targets rural/urban communities Offers OJT opportunities
Promotion	All efforts the company or organization stimulates the popularity of their product in the market, for instance by advertising, promotional programs, and so on	How information is shared with prospects. Direct methods include efforts shared directly to prospective candidates or advertising. Indirect methods include creation of web-based materials or sharing of information with nonprospective candidates, such as agencies or outside personnel	Must include direct outreach methods
People	People who are directly or indirectly involved in the trade of the product or service. Mainly customer contact employees, customers, personnel, and management.	Teaching and administrative staff involved within program. Includes university staff who interact with prospective students before and during program. Includes partnerships between IHE and other institutions, LEA, DOE or specific schools used in development, design, and delivery of programs.	Must include one of the following: Hiring specific personnel related to program priorities Use of partnership with other institutions or agencies
Physical evidence	Refers to an environment in which a service comes about from an interaction with an employee and a customer which is combined with a tangible commodity	Refers to whether program completers receive a certificate versus a degree. Also includes campus facilities or quality of teaching materials and technology	Must include one of the following: Provides opportunity for degree attainment Use of high-quality facilities or technology
Processes	The activities, procedures, protocols and more by which the service in question is eventually delivered to the customer	Processes used to help prospective or current candidates navigate stages from inquiry to graduation. Includes use of less paperwork or requirements, streamlined coursework, or specific personnel such as advisors or program coordinators	Must include one of the following: Specific course sequences Modified entrance requirements Specific personnel

Note. Element definitions provided by Van Vliet (2011). OJT: on-the-job training; LEA: local education agencies; DOE: departments of education; ATP = alternative teacher preparation.

Recruitment Targets and Consumers

The first step in any marketing approach has been to identify and analyze who the consumers are and then to identify their needs and wants (Nicolescu, 2009). In teacher education, a number of identified consumers and markets already exist. Traditional teacher preparation programs typically target full-time college students, whereas nontraditional programs attract middle-aged adults or nonendorsed teacher personnel in schools who are unable to commit to full-time teacher training programs (Rosenberg & Sindelar, 2005). Consequently, teacher educators have designed preservice ATP programs that provided preparation with minimal disruption to the lives of their nontraditional adult students (Lemke, 2010).

One specific market identified to alleviate the teacher shortage has been paraeducators (Burbank, Bates, & Schrum, 2009). The term paraeducators, as defined by the National Education Association (NEA, 2018), refers to school employees who work alongside and under the supervision of a licensed or certified educator to support and assist in providing instructional and other services to children, youth, and their families. Although this type of position in schools has been identified by a variety of terms including paraprofessional, teacher aide, educational assistant, or instructional assistant, for the purpose of this review, the term paraeducator is used.

Individuals hired full-time into classrooms as the teacher, but who do not yet have the proper training and credentials to be endorsed by the state have been called emergency hire, unlicensed, uncertified, provisional licensed, or unendorsed teachers. For this review, adults hired into special education classrooms without having completed state licensure requirements are referred to as unendorsed.

Lemke (2010) described an additional consumer market as those who wish to change from their current career and become a teacher, sometimes referred to as “repotters,” career-changers, or mid-career professionals. Mid-career professionals offer the opportunity to attract and recruit mature, adult individuals with life experience in areas outside of education. An additional benefit of targeting this market is that the number of potential recruits is almost limitless (Dai et al., 2007).

Other possible targeted consumers for special education teacher preparation programs include community college students, parents of children with disabilities, adults with disabilities, and licensed teachers in areas outside of special education. Regardless of the type of consumer, one prominent need across all markets is to increase the number of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) educators in the teacher workforce (Salend, Whittaker, Duhaney, & Smith, 2003; Valle-Riestra, Shealey, & Cramer, 2011). Issues of an overrepresentation of CLD students qualified for special education and an underrepresentation of teachers from CLD backgrounds are reported (Tyler, Yzquierdo, Lopez-Reyna, & Flippin, 2002).

The 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix Framework

The Service Marketing Mix, also referred to as the 7P model or the 7 P’s of Booms and Bitner (1981), extended the original marketing mix model by Jerome McCarthy from four to seven elements. According to Ivy (2008), “The marketing mix is a set of controllable marketing tools that an institution uses to produce the response it wants from its various target markets” (p. 289).

Method

A search of the literature was conducted to identify ATP programs developed to recruit and train special education teachers. First, keywords related to recruitment and development of programs for training special education teachers (i.e., recruit, attract, shortage, program, ATP, alternative route, and certification) were identified. Keywords were used in conjunction with the exact term “special education” across multiple databases including Academic Search Complete, Eric, and Google Scholar. Search results combined from the databases totaled 309 potential articles. After eliminating duplicates and conducting a title and abstract review, 103 potential articles were screened. A total of 36 articles received full-text review, with seven articles meeting criteria. In addition, review of reference lists from identified articles revealed three more articles meeting criteria. A hand search of Rural Special Education Quarterly (RSEQ) and Teacher Education and Special Education (TESE) revealed an additional seven articles meeting inclusion criteria. A total of 17 articles are included in this systematic review.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The following inclusion criteria were applied to identify applicable articles: (a) preservice program designed as a result of teacher shortage to recruit new PK-12 classroom teachers, (b) targeted special education endorsement, (c) within the United States, (d) peer-reviewed journal article, and (e) published between 1997 and 2018. In addition to empirical articles, program reports including original program data were included. Articles targeting training of other special education personnel outside of classroom teachers such as training paraprofessionals, early interventionists, behavior analysts, or higher education faculty were not included. Programs not leading directly to teacher endorsement or certification were excluded. Finally, because the focus of this review was on efforts to recruit more people into the special education teaching profession, articles that did not include the number of participants pursuing special education licensure within programs were excluded.

Interrater Reliability

The principle investigators created an inclusion and exclusion criteria table to use in review of all articles during the full-text review. The principle investigators identified 17 articles meeting criteria. An interrater reliability check was conducted by the second author. A total of 35% of articles were selected using an online random generator tool (random.org). The identified articles were then reviewed using the inclusion and exclusion criteria table. Interrater reliability was calculated by dividing the smaller number of criteria met by the larger number of criteria met and multiplying by 100. There were no discrepancies between authors resulting in interrater reliability of 100%.

Coding Procedures

The 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix had not been applied previously to teacher education; therefore, there was a need to determine what types of teacher preparation program components would fall within each of the seven elements. Therefore, the principle investigators used the Framework Method (Gale, Heath, Cameron, Rashid, & Redwood, 2013), creating a spreadsheet including all descriptive information of each ATP program included in the review. Common program features and descriptions were noted, grouped and then categorized within each corresponding marketing element defined by Van Vliet (2011). For example, all 17 programs identified which state the program was based in. The state was categorized under “locale” and was then defined under the marketing element of “place.” After categorizing program features across elements, a consumer lens was employed to distinguish which identified features increases the attractability of the ATP to identified markets. Information by program was then refined by coding all 17 identified ATP programs across each element included (see Table 1). Finally, the authors printed a new blank spreadsheet and recoded all 17 programs to check for consistencies across identified features. Any inconsistencies were marked and then verified to ensure reliability of results.

Results

Initial database and hand searches yielded 316 titles of articles for review. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 17 articles remained for this review of the literature of ATP programs designed to recruit new PK-12 special educators into the profession. Analysis of program efforts in design and delivery are shared using the 7 P’s of the Service Marketing Mix Framework.

Consumers

A total of 1,419 participants were recruited into the 17 programs identified with 460 teacher candidates (32%) recruited into programs targeting rural areas. The number of program participants ranged from 15 to 475 (see Table 2). A total of 10 articles provided program retention data (number of students starting and completing program), ranging from 66% to 100% retention with an average of 85%. In 4 of the 10 articles, not all participants included in data had completed the program and therefore retention percentage includes graduates and currently enrolled students.

Table 2.

7 P’s Marketing Mix Elements Effectively Addressed by Alternative Teacher Preparation Programs for Recruitment.

Source	7 P’s Marketing Mix Elements							Outcomes
Source	Product	Price	Place	Promotion	People	Physical evidence	Processes	n	Completers %
Snell, Martin, and Orelove (1997)	+	+	+	+	+	−	−	75	81%
Jordan et al. (1999) ^a	+	−	+	+	+	+	+	128	—
Cegelka and Alvarado (2000) ^a	−	+	+	−	+	+	−	71	—
Lemke and Harrison (2000) ^a	+	−	+	+	+	+	+	17	94%
Jensen, Churchill, and Davis (2001) ^a	−	+	+	+	+	−	+	76	93%^b
Knapczyk, Chapman, Rodes, and Chung (2001)	+	−	+	−	+	−	+	475	—
Andrews, Miller, Evans, and Smith (2003)	+	+	+	−	+	+	+	97	90%
Salend, Whittaker, Duhaney, and Smith (2003)	+	+	−	+	+	+	+	69	96%
White (2004)	+	+	+	+	−	+	+	165	66%
Esposito and Lal (2005)	+	+	+	−	+	−	+	58	97%^b
Larwood (2005) ^a	+	−	+	−	+	+	+	36	—
Bargerhuff, Dunne, and Renick (2007) ^a	+	−	+	−	+	+	−	38	78%
Jameson and Mcdonnell (2007) ^a	+	+	+	−	+	+	+	15	^b
Kurtts, Cooper, and Boyles (2007)	+	+	+	+	+	−	+	34	88%^b
McLaren and Rutland (2013) ^a	+	−	+	−	+	+	+	19	93%
Childre (2014) ^a	+	−	+	−	+	+	+	15	—
Rooks-Ellis (2017) ^a	+	+	+	−	+	+	−	45	—

Note. + = ATP program included at least one criteria for review identified in Table 1; – = ATP program did not include identified criteria for review; ATP = alternative teacher preparation.

Programs targeting rural areas.

At time of study, not all participants had completed program; therefore, percentage includes graduated and/or currently enrolled.

Almost all identified ATP programs (n = 16, 94%) targeted recruitment of people already employed in school settings (see Table 3). More specifically, unendorsed teachers were primarily targeted (65%), followed by paraeducators (35%), licensed teachers in other areas (29%), and other school personnel (18%). Of the nine articles targeting markets outside of school, more than half targeted mid-career professionals. There were only two programs each that recruited adults with disabilities, community college, or university students. Parents of children with disabilities (n = 1, 6%) was the least sought after market. Four of the five programs targeting teachers already licensed in other areas and mid-career professionals were focused on rural areas.

Table 3.

Consumer Markets for Recruiting New Special Educators in Alternative Teacher Preparation Programs.

Source	School personnel				Other participants					CLD
Source	PE	UN	LT	SP	MC	AD	PD	CC	U	n	%
Snell, Martin, and Orelove (1997)	−	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	5	7%
Jordan et al. (1999) ^a	−	+	+	−	−	−	−	+	+	—	—
Cegelka and Alvarado (2000) ^a	−	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	—	—
Lemke and Harrison (2000) ^a	−	+	−	−	+	−	−	−	−	14	82%
Jensen, Churchill, and Davis (2001) ^a	+	−	−	−	−	+	+	−	−	8	10%
Knapczyk, Chapman, Rodes, and Chung (2001)	+	+	+	+	−	−	−	−	−	—	—
Andrews, Miller, Evans, and Smith (2003)	+	+	−	+	+	−	−	−	−	41	42%
Salend, Whittaker, Duhaney, and Smith (2003)	−	−	−	−	−	+	−	−	+	51	74%
White (2004)	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	86	52%
Esposito and Lal (2005)	−	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	—	—
Larwood (2005) ^a	−	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	—	—
Bargerhuff, Dunne, and Renick (2007) ^a	−	+	+	−	+	−	−	−	−	—	—
Jameson and Mcdonnell (2007) ^a	−	−	+	−	+	−	−	−	−	—	—
Kurtts, Cooper, and Boyles (2007)	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	+	−	11	33%
McLaren and Rutland (2013) ^a	−	+	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	—	—
Childre (2014) ^a	+	+	−	−	+	−	−	−	−	17	40%
Rooks-Ellis (2017) ^a	−	−	−	+	−	−	−	−	−	—	—

Note. + = included in program description; – = not included in program description; CLD = culturally and linguistically diverse populations; PE = paraeducators; UN = unendorsed teachers; LT = licensed teachers in areas outside of special education; SP = other school personnel; MC = mid-career professionals; AD = adults with disabilities; PD = parents of children with disabilities; CC = community college students; U = university students.

Programs targeting rural areas.

Across the various targeted consumers, eight programs (47%) recruited people of CLD backgrounds. The number of CLD program participants within those targeted efforts ranged from 7% to 82%, with an average of 43% (see Table 3).

Service Marketing Mix 7 P Framework

Articles identified addressed three to six elements of the marketing mix when recruiting, designing, and delivering an ATP program with an average of 4.9 elements (70%) per program and slightly less for rural programs (4.5 elements, 64%; see Table 2). No programs used all seven elements of the Marketing Mix Framework in attracting prospective candidates. In addition, no single element was addressed in every article. However, findings do not take into account additional details that may have been included but are not stated in the published report. Findings listed are based on reported descriptions only. Therefore, no assumption is made that these data represent everything each program did.

All but one program (94%) addressed the elements of people and place. Product was addressed by all but two articles, both targeting rural areas. Two additional elements were addressed by about three-fourths of programs: (a) processes (75%), and (b) physical evidence (71%). The element of price was addressed in 10 programs (59%); however, six of the seven articles not addressing price were programs targeting rural areas. Overall, programs used the element of promotion least (41%).

Product

Product is the ATP program design element including number of credits, length, targeted licensure outcomes, and whether it uses a cohorted design. Almost all ATP programs identified used program design elements to recruit consumers. Total credits by program ranged from 15 to 127. Reported lengths of programs ranged from 18 to 42 months. Only two programs had been designed to be completed in less than 2 years (Esposito & Lal, 2005; Snell, Martin, & Orelove, 1997) and neither targeted rural areas. Five programs had been designed to take 2 years to complete (Bargerhuff et al., 2007; Cegelka & Alvarado, 2000; Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Larwood, 2005; McLaren & Rutland, 2013), whereas six programs were to be completed in more than 2 years (Andrews, Miller, Evans, & Smith, 2003; Childre, 2014; Jordan et al., 1999; Knapczyk, Chapman, Rodes, & Chung, 2001; Lemke & Harrison, 2000; Rooks-Ellis, 2017). Most programs used a cohort model (n = 12, 71%) and held courses outside of the typical school day. Five of the six programs using summer coursework were in programs targeting rural areas.

Most ATP programs had been developed to specifically target licensure categories of disability or level (n = 12, 71%). Remaining articles did not specify a specific licensure or category of disability (Cegelka & Alvarado, 2000; Esposito & Lal, 2005; Lemke & Harrison, 2000; Salend et al., 2003; White, 2004). Nine programs targeted disability category(s) with five targeting high-incidence disabilities (Andrews et al., 2003; Bargerhuff et al., 2007; Jensen, Churchill, & Davis, 2001; Jordan et al., 1999; Kurtts, Cooper, & Boyles, 2007), three targeting low-incidence disabilities (Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Larwood, 2005; Snell et al., 1997), and one targeting both high- and low-incidence disabilities (Knapczyk et al., 2001). Two programs specifically targeted the early childhood level (McLaren & Rutland, 2013; Rooks-Ellis, 2017), and one targeted dual licensure with special education and general education content areas (Childre, 2014), all being from programs targeting rural areas.

Price

Price is the cost of the program. A large majority of ATP programs (n = 14, 82%) received some type of outside funding (see Table 4). More than half (n =10, 59%) provided some funding directly to their consumers. The extent of funding ranged from providing support for purchasing a laptop computer (Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007) to full tuition, books, child care, and ability to maintain employment at school with full salary (Andrews et al., 2003). Five programs reported receiving funds to assist with program development, personnel compensation, or recruitment. In comparing the ratio of programs specifically targeting rural areas, less funding was provided for tuition and books to students, whereas more funding was used to support program personnel.

Table 4.

Alternative Teacher Preparation Program Price Element.

Source	Consumer funding				Program funding			Funder(s)
Source	Tuition	Books	Living expenses	Other	Development	Personnel	Recruitment	Funder(s)
Snell, Martin, and Orelove (1997)	+	+	+	+	−	−	−	Federal
Jordan et al. (1999) ^a	−	−	−	—	+	+	+	Other
Cegelka and Alvarado (2000) ^a	+	−	+	−	−	+	−	Federal & State
Lemke and Harrison (2000) ^a	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	—
Jensen, Churchill, and Davis (2001) ^a	+	−	−	−	−	+	−	OSEP
Knapczyk, Chapman, Rodes, and Chung (2001)	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	—
Andrews, Miller, Evans, and Smith (2003)	+	+	−	+	−	−	−	Federal
Salend, Whittaker, Duhaney, and Smith (2003)	+	−	+	−	−	−	−	DOE
White (2004)	+	+	−	+	−	−	−	OSEP
Esposito and Lal (2005)	+	+	−	−	+	+	+	OSEP
Larwood (2005) ^a	−	−	−	−	−	+	−	—
Bargerhuff, Dunne, and Renick (2007) ^a	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	Other
Jameson and Mcdonnell (2007) ^a	−	−	−	+	−	−	−	DOE
Kurtts, Cooper, and Boyles (2007)	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	DOE
McLaren and Rutland (2013) ^a	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	Federal & State
Childre (2014) ^a	−	−	−	−	−	−	−	OSEP & DOE
Rooks-Ellis (2017) ^a	+	−	−	−	−	−	−	OSEP

Note. + = included in program description, – = not included in program description. OSEP = Office of Special Education Programs; DOE = Department of Education.

Programs targeting rural areas.

Place

Place involves the method and form of program delivery. The 17 programs identified in this systematic review were from 10 different states: California, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Utah, and Virginia. Only two states had multiple programs: North Carolina (n = 3) and California (n = 6). Most programs targeted a geographical need in recruiting teachers to work in either rural or urban schools (n = 12, 71%). Most programs were developed for rural communities (n = 10, 59%) as only two were developed specifically for urban communities (Andrews et al., 2003; Esposito & Lal, 2005). Almost half of the ATP programs delivered the program face-to-face, whether on campus or at alternate sites (Andrews et al., 2003; Cegelka & Alvarado, 2000; Esposito & Lal, 2005; Kurtts et al., 2007; J. Lemke & Harrison, 2000; Salend et al., 2003; Snell et al., 1997; White, 2004). Only three programs used primarily distance methods (Jensen et al., 2001; Jordan et al., 1999; Rooks-Ellis, 2017). Six programs used both face-to-face and distance methods in a hybrid program (Bargerhuff et al., 2007; Childre, 2014; Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Knapczyk et al., 2001; Larwood, 2005; McLaren & Rutland, 2013). Programs targeting rural areas included all the distance programs, all but one of the hybrid programs, and only two of the remaining eight face-to-face programs. All but three programs provided on-the-job training (OJT) opportunities for meeting field and supervision requirements (Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Rooks-Ellis, 2017; Salend et al., 2003).

Promotion

Promotion is how program information is shared with prospects. Almost half of ATP programs identified did not share information related to direct or indirect outreach for promotion of programs (n = 8, 47%). Nine programs used elements of promotion, with seven using direct outreach to prospective candidates, and all nine using indirect outreach methods (see Table 5). The most common direct promotion methods included the use of sending program materials or holding information meetings directly with prospective students. The most common indirect promotion method was sharing of program information with other agencies.

Table 5.

Alternative Teacher Preparation Programs Including Promotion Element.

Source	Direct type	Direct outreach description	Indirect type	Indirect outreach description
Snell, Martin, and Orelove (1997)	M, DM	Used newsletters and direct teacher mailings	R	Nomination forms sent to all sped directors with description of program and timeline
Jordan et al. (1999) ^a	M, A, DM, IM	Direct mail to targeted audiences: schools and professional organizations. Follow up with prospects generated through personal contacts. Newspaper/newsletters/radio advertising/public service announcements. Tracked all inquiries and coordinated follow-up with personnel resources	IM, S	Intensive follow up with community contacts and coordinators at district level. Visit school district offices to promote program during spring and summer. Presentations to civic other community organizations
Lemke and Harrison (2000) ^a	IM	Held informational meetings for unendorsed teachers and assisted with admissions processes	S	Contacted district and built relationship with area administrators
Jensen, Churchill, and Davis (2001) ^a	M	Program brochures widely distributed	IM, S	Held regional meetings and university-school contracts with 42 county offices
Andrews, Miller, Evans, and Smith (2003)	—		R	Most of the new candidates are referred by recent graduates
Salend, Whittaker, Duhaney, and Smith (2003)	M, G, IM	Created video and referrals of diverse graduates, who also talk directly to interested prospects. Presentations to individuals enrolled in Spanish, Latin American Studies, and Black Studies classes at University	W, IM, S, R	Website with program information, application forms, and online newsletters. Held national, statewide, and regional meetings. Contacted programs and agencies targeting CLD populations. Graduates encouraged acquaintances to apply. Information sent to teacher training programs throughout the United States
White (2004)	M	Flyers about funding distributed directly to prospective paraeducator participants	S	Notified all local principals and directors of special education in major school system within university’s service region
Kurtts, Cooper, and Boyles (2007)	IM, G	Used informational sessions for school systems and community colleges related to admission, transfer procedures, and project criteria	W	Website created to include program information and student profiles
Childre (2014) ^a	—		S	Partnered with Oconee Regional Education Service Agency. Direct contact with area administrators to determine hiring needs and to offer the program to unendorsed teachers

Note. M = materials; A = advertising; DM = direct mail; G = used graduates or current students of program; IM = informational meetings or presentations; W = website; S = shared information directly to other agencies; R = referrals from program or outside agencies; CLD: culturally and linguistically diverse.

Programs targeting rural areas.

People

People include who is involved with the program. All ATP programs had been provided and designed by IHE. Excluding three articles (Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Kurtts et al., 2007; Larwood, 2005), all programs involved partnerships with other institutions or agencies. Of these 14 articles, all used partnerships between IHEs and other state or local agencies, with the exception of Cegelka and Alvarado (2000) and Knapczyk et al. (2001). Instead, these programs included a partnership between the primary institution and either branch campuses or community colleges. Three programs built a partnership with a specific local school for developing the ATP program (Esposito & Lal, 2005; Jensen et al., 2001; Lemke & Harrison, 2000).

In addition to utilization of partnerships with other institutions, agencies, or schools, programs described the importance of specific personnel involved in program delivery. All but one program (White, 2004) reported the importance of support for program delivery using high-quality faculty, administrative or technical support staff, or through hiring school-level teachers and mentors.

Physical evidence

Physical evidence is represented by whether the program leads to a certificate or degree and if there are quality materials or facilities involved. All programs provided opportunities to receive endorsement through a degree program or as a certificate. Three programs did not specify the level of their certificate program (Jensen et al., 2001; Knapczyk et al., 2001; Larwood, 2005). Two programs offered certification at the undergraduate level (Kurtts et al., 2007; White, 2004). All remaining programs had been offered at the postbaccalaureate or graduate level. Within graduate-level programs, eight programs provided the endorsement program within a master’s degree, and an additional three programs offered the option to do a certificate or master’s degree (Andrews et al., 2003; Cegelka & Alvarado, 2000; Jordan et al., 1999). The ATP described by White (2004) offered licensure credentials as an option within an undergraduate or graduate degree. Seven programs offered endorsement only (Esposito & Lal, 2005; Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Jensen et al., 2001; Knapczyk et al., 2001; Kurtts et al., 2007; Larwood, 2005; Snell et al., 1997).

In a different form of physical evidence, eight programs, with seven targeting rural areas, described specific technology used in delivery of program (Bargerhuff et al., 2007; Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Jensen et al., 2001; Jordan et al., 1999; Knapczyk et al., 2001; Larwood, 2005; McLaren & Rutland, 2013; Rooks-Ellis, 2017). No articles provided information related to innovative or key features of campus facilities.

Processes

Processes include supports in navigating prospects from inquiry through graduation. A total of 10 programs (59%) had specific personnel to support prospects and teacher candidates (Andrews et al., 2003; Childre, 2014; Esposito & Lal, 2005; Jensen et al., 2001; Jordan et al., 1999; Kurtts et al., 2007; Larwood, 2005; Lemke & Harrison, 2000; Salend et al., 2003; White, 2004). Only six ATP programs (35%) provided specific course sequences to help prospects understand expectations based on courseload and timeline (Andrews et al., 2003; Childre, 2014; Jameson & Mcdonnell, 2007; Knapczyk et al., 2001; McLaren & Rutland, 2013; Salend et al., 2003). No programs used a reduction in paperwork or entry requirements. However, after initial application review, two programs included the use of additional entry requirements (e.g., interviews and essays) as part of a two-prong application process (Salend et al., 2003; White, 2004).

Special Considerations for Rural ATP Programs

Findings highlighted many distinguishing differences among the 10 identified programs targeting rural areas. Considering program design, the element of place and addressing the barrier of access was the main priority with the element of product being of limited focus. Cegelka and Alvarado (2000) describe the issues of access as being “in addition to population sparsity, rural districts frequently are characterized by geographic barriers (mountains, desert terrain, untraversable roads) that serve to isolate them from access to the service and opportunities available in urban communities . . .” (p. 15). As a way to combat issues of access in rural areas, technology was more evident in the physical evidence and place elements. All the programs using distance formats and all but one of the hybrid programs were in rural ATP programs. This may intersect with the element of price, with funding not as likely to go to consumers as program funding may have been required for the purchase, maintenance, and personnel associated with new technologies. In the program described by Larwood (2005), teacher candidates lived in rural areas 230 to 600 miles away from the university, justifying the need to prioritize access as part of program modifications. In addition, rural ATP programs were most likely to use summer coursework, perhaps allowing the option to teach more courses in a shorter amount of time, which could assist in overall costs related to travel and program delivery by IHE program personnel. Another cost contributing to the lack of direct funding to consumers in rural programs may be the need to fund more program personnel (i.e., hiring additional people out in the rural communities; see Table 4).

Finally, when looking at the needs of rural ATP programs, one significant finding was the disproportion of programs targeting rural areas (59%) and the number of new teacher candidates produced (32%). Although this finding is understandable, given that rural areas have smaller populations from which to recruit, the fact that only 4 of the 10 programs used the element of promotion is unsettling. Given the high costs of program delivery and development, the need to capitalize on the number of students recruited into the program is even more critical for delivering and sustaining ATP programs in rural areas. Using indirect and especially direct outreach efforts among targeted rural communities is essential to improving outcomes and maximizing the ROI as individuals already living within rural areas are more likely to remain teaching long term in rural schools.

Programs targeting recruitment of CLD population proved successful, with an average of 48% CLD participants in targeted programs (see Table 3). This has been encouraging, as current special education demographics reported that teachers from CLD backgrounds made up less than 14% of the teacher workforce (Salend et al., 2003). This is especially important for meeting the needs of rural areas, as demographic changes are creating a new melting pot of students including the rural South, which had the largest minority growth over a 10-year period (Sutton et al., 2014).

Discussion

Over the past 20 years, programs have been designed in an effort to attract more special education teacher candidates into the profession. As expected, the most common targeted consumer market for ATPs was individuals already working in school settings (see Table 3). Targeting school personnel provided a smaller, but more likely, pool of prospects because these individuals already demonstrated interest and commitment in working with students and in schools. Unendorsed teachers were targeted in more than half of the included programs, as providing endorsement for these individuals reduced pressure on both the individual and the school at which they were employed. However, there are many reservations associated with the use of unendorsed teachers in schools due to high attrition (Wilson, Darling-Hammond, & Berry, 2001). Therefore, for greater long-term gains, caution should be taken in prioritizing program efforts solely on recruiting unendorsed teachers. This review reveals that less than one-third of programs made efforts to recruit mid-career professionals. Those that did were almost exclusively targeting rural areas. Targeting mid-career professionals requires more widespread comprehensive recruitment efforts. In addition, the programmatic needs of mid-career professionals are not as streamlined as those of existing school personnel. More comprehensive efforts to recruit new and varied markets is advisable.

Teacher education personnel prioritized developing programs that they felt would be of high quality based on known research of effective practices. The focus on quality and ensuring program candidates receive appropriate instruction on a variety of domains may be the reason for the lack of ATP program identified in this review using shorter program durations or credits as an attractive marketing tool. In fact, 35% of programs required more than 2 years to complete, which may be a deterrent for interested prospects, especially those pressured to obtain endorsements quickly. However, program developers of 71% of the identified programs did use specific licensure outcomes, which could help to offset hesitancies related to program duration and credits. The graduate program with the longest duration and total credits targeted dual preparation in general education content areas and special education (Childre, 2014). Childre acknowledged the impact of offering such a rigorous program, stating challenges associated with “enrollment maintenance and competitiveness with less rigorous and less lengthy programs” (p. 29). Programs focused on rigor may want to look to capitalizing on other elements of the marketing mix as a way to balance attractiveness of programs for prospects.

It was interesting to note that although 14 programs received funding, only 10 programs, with only 4 being rural ATP programs, provided funding directly to teacher candidates (see Table 4). Considering most ATP programs are offered at the postbaccalaureate level, this marketed pool often had already accumulated debt related to acquiring an undergraduate degree. Therefore, providing funding incentives to offset program costs may be one of the most valuable marketing tools available. The amount of funding and support provided varied greatly, but even the smallest offering may still be significant for the purpose of attracting more individuals to pursue a teacher preparation program as a marketing tactic. Sindelar et al. (2018) cautioned against relying heavily on funding alone, as they found these programs were less successful in retaining teachers beyond the first few years in the classroom. However, using some funding along with the other marketing elements may be an effective tool to consider.

A total of 10 different states were represented among the 17 programs identified. This helped to confirm that the shortage of special education teachers is widespread across the nation including across rural areas. Across states, programs were designed to meet geographical needs (71%) with rural areas needing the most targeted efforts. In addition to a high number of rural-based programs, many distance and hybrid program options had been offered as a solution to the vast distances between candidates and institutions, especially within rural communities. Five of the eight most recent programs (63%) used the hybrid format. With the rapid growth of distance technology and federal initiatives for installation of broadband technology in rural and remote areas since 2005 (Sindelar et al., 2018), the use of more distance and hybrid program formats may become even more prevalent in future ATP design.

Regardless of the state or geographical need, a high proportion of programs developed allowed for OJT opportunities, correlating with findings suggesting most participants had been school personnel. Providing OJT opportunities was important in allowing program candidates to remain employed in school settings. However, an OJT model may not be as good a fit for mid-career professionals, as they would have to quit their current job and move into a position at a school without having first had any training or experience. ATPs may want to consider looking for alternative placement options for field work and student teaching that would accommodate working professionals employed outside of school settings.

Of all the elements in the marketing mix, promotion was the least common marketing strategy used (see Table 2). The lack of promotional effort is interesting considering the framework of supply and demand within the marketing context. To combat the teacher shortage, there is a need to attract more people to enter teacher preparation programs. However, 47% of programs did not include any specific outreach efforts to reach out to potential prospects. Most programs using promotion strategies used indirect recruitment methods by sharing information through outside agencies and personnel (see Table 5). Snell et al. (1997) reported “many recruitment notices sent to school divisions inviting candidates to apply were not passed from administrators to the appropriate teachers” (p. 230). Therefore, indirect methods are often ineffective, as they do not assure that the information reaches targeted consumer markets.

With distance education technology having a large presence in program format, having only two programs that used Web-based marketing and websites seems imbalanced. In Sindelar et al.’s (2018) summary of emerging practices for recruitment, the use of social media was encouraged and yet is absent among all identified programs within this review. In addition, programs that provided direct or indirect outreach are varied in scope and intensity (see Table 5). Jensen et al. (2001) used program brochures as direct outreach and held regional meetings with personnel from partner agencies as indirect methods. These promotional efforts are relatively low cost and required less time and effort than the more comprehensive efforts employed by Jordan et al. (1999) and Salend et al. (2003). Jordan et al. (1999) used direct mailings to targeted audiences, follow up and tracking to nurture leads, and was the only program to use newspaper and radio advertising. This program recruited the largest number of candidates of the rural programs and the second largest number overall. Salend et al. (2003) program promotion efforts included videos of graduates who also talked directly with prospects in addition to creation of a website and many other direct and indirect outreach methods. This program recruited the second largest number of CLD students overall (see Table 3). Positive outcomes related to outreach efforts brings up questions as to why promotion has not been a greater investment using more comprehensive and targeted marketing strategies, given that almost all programs were provided funding through external sources.

While specific recruitment methods have not previously been analyzed for effectiveness in attracting more applicants, White (2004) shared they had four times more applicants than they could support with 433 applications and 165 funded participants over four cohorts. Therefore, some funding opportunities actually created limitations on the number of participants a program could support. However, it remains important to increase the number of applicants as a strategy for increasing the quality of participants based on a variety of eligibility measures. Targeted promotion strategies, such as prospect informational sessions, utilization of websites, and social media, as well as graduate profiles and referrals, remain as one element of the Service Marketing Mix that could be expanded in future ATPs.

Unlike promotion, the element of people has been consistently addressed by all but one program (White, 2004). Almost all programs had been built on partnerships (82%), primarily with local and state agencies. In the recent update on rural demand for special education teachers by Sindelar et al. (2018), it was reported that well-coordinated programs with university partners reported positive outcomes. Although all programs were created by an IHE, two program partnerships were a result of an outside agency initiating a request for development of a program to address local shortages (Bargerhuff et al., 2007; Lemke & Harrison, 2000).

Programs leading to degree attainment with licensure have been more attractive than programs leading to certification only. Especially at the graduate level, opportunities to receive a master’s degree can attract different consumers based on the physical evidence of degree attainment. However, almost half of identified programs (41%) only led to certification. One option provided by three programs allowed candidates a choice between certification only or continuing on for a master’s degree. Having the option to begin with certification and continue to a master’s degree may be an ideal strategy to maximize applicant numbers, as it accommodates the needs and priorities of all consumer markets.

The final element, processes, was used by 75% of programs. Programs focused more on program coordinators or advisors rather than support personnel related to application processes. Providing application supports for potential candidates may be an important and easy strategy for recruitment that has been overlooked in program design and delivery. In addition, having set course sequences available can remediate initial prospect concerns related to timeline and workload. One interesting finding related to enrollment requirements and procedures had been that no programs used a reduction in requirements related to entrance tests, Grade Point Average (GPA), or other traditional eligibility requirements as a method of attracting more candidates. In contrast, two programs increased requirements using an initial screening of applications and then inviting the more highly qualified candidates to complete a second application process. Both programs (Salend et al., 2003; White, 2004) offered tuition and other financial support; therefore, the element of price may have helped to alleviate obstacles of more rigorous application processes.

Conclusions on final outcomes related to the number of participants recruited into the identified programs are limited due to differences in reporting between programs. The number of participants for each program was difficult to compare across the 17 programs, as numbers were not broken down by year or cycle to make equitable comparisons. However, 4 of the 17 programs spoke in detail of success regarding meeting program capacity and the quality of their program candidates (Andrews et al., 2003; Jensen et al., 2001; Salend et al., 2003; White, 2004). Among the four identified programs, all had addressed six elements of the 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix except for Jensen et al. (2001), who had addressed five elements and is the only program of the four targeting rural areas (see Table 2). Of the 7 P’s, the only ones addressed by all four programs were the elements of price and processes. In addition, all four programs intentionally targeted underrepresented groups from culturally linguistic and diverse populations (see Table 3). Some additional notable similarities across all four programs include: (a) funding provided by outside agencies, (b) funding given directly to students for tuition, (c) partnerships with either state, local, or specific schools, and (d) having specified program advisors or coordinators. Quality of program candidates are addressed when describing the application process, as the only two programs having used additional entry requirements as part of a two-prong application process are represented in this group (Salend et al., 2003; White, 2004). In addition, quality of candidates was addressed through student outcomes. For example, White (2004) wrote,

The mean GPAs provide evidence that the students were successful, with an overall mean GPA (4.0 scale) of 3.6 for graduates and 3.4 for undergraduates. One of these students was a winner of the College of Education’s Teacher Education award, the highest honor bestowed by the College of Education. One student was the outstanding senior in special education, and two other students received other college honors. (p. 216)

In addition, White goes on to say “Of the 18 completers from the first cohort—originally recruited 13 years ago—all are still employed in special education by the public schools” (p. 217). Another example of programs attesting to quality of candidates is the low number of candidates being counseled out of the program (Andrews et al., 2003; Jensen et al., 2001). In the end, there may be a connection between the ability to recruit enough participants to fill program capacity and the ability to increase the level of quality.

Bargerhuff et al. (2007) addressed the importance of needing higher numbers of applicants by reporting “to make the program fiscally feasible, Wright State required a guarantee that at least 20 students would participate” (p. 5). Bargerhuff et al. (2007) did report meeting capacity, having 27 candidates; however, a primary difference is that the state agency requesting the development of the program was then responsible for producing the appropriate number of candidates rather than being on the shoulders of the institute of higher education. When looking at all programs identified in this review, three programs had less than 20 participants, perhaps indicating the likelihood that more participants could have been accommodated had there been more qualified applicants recruited. With the costs involved in developing, recruiting, and delivering new ATP programs, making targeted efforts to attract and retain the maximum number of prospects and candidates possible is advantageous. The 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix provides a framework to evaluate, revise, and develop new program efforts as a strategy in helping to address the severe teacher shortage in special education.

Limitations

Limitations of this review included use of only peer-reviewed articles and not dissertations. This study focused on recruitment and marketing methods related to identified programs. Some reported marketing elements may have been incorporated into the program after the program start; therefore, not having actually impacted recruitment outcomes. In contrast, some programs may have implemented additional marketing elements but did not share them in their reporting. Research has shown that recruitment has only been half the battle, as teacher attrition has been just as important in tackling the teacher shortage. Further research is needed that examines characteristics of programs that have successfully recruited, trained, and then retained teachers within the profession.

Another primary limitation is that strategies effective in the world of marketing may not directly equate to being effective in the development of teacher preparation programs. Although some elements and strategies are more effective in drawing more interest in pursuing a profession, each element needs further study to determine effectiveness in producing targeted outcomes. This review has been purely based on a marketing lens, identifying which factors of program design and implementation have been used among alternative preservice teacher preparation programs.

Conclusion

Evaluating teacher preparation programs as successful involves a complex set of variables and considerations. The first step in improving outcomes for students with disabilities is assuring that every classroom is filled with a highly qualified and effective teacher. With the persistent need to attract more people into the teaching profession, comprehensive recruitment strategies require more than just the creation of new programs. This literature review attempted to review past ATPs to analyze what recruitment strategies were employed from a marketing viewpoint. The 7 P’s Service Marketing Mix could serve as a tool to help teacher educators guide their efforts related to program design, recruitment, and delivery of new or current ATP programs. Although use of all marketing suggestions for every program is encouraged, the recommendation is to keep these elements in mind, at a minimum, when designing or adjusting current ATP programs to maximize program impact.

One primary component needing more attention is the element of promotion to assure that program personnel use both direct and indirect strategies to maximize potential applicants to the programs. Widening the applicant pool can create more opportunities for better selectivity of qualified applicants and assuring that costs related to program development and delivery are worthwhile. Recommendations for future development of ATP programs include partnerships within IHE to foster collaboration between colleges of education and colleges of business in using expertise of faculty in the field of marketing. Further research in how to apply research-based marketing techniques more effectively continues to be warranted.

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) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

*Andrews

Miller

Evans

Smith

S. D.

(2003). An internship model to recruit, train, and retain special educators for culturally diverse urban classrooms: A program description. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26, 74–78.

*Bargerhuff

M. E.

Dunne

J. D.

Renick

P. R.

(2007). Giving teachers a chance: Taking special education teacher preparation programs to rural communities. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 26, 3–12. doi:10.1177/875687050702600102

Berry

A. B.

Petrin

R. A.

Gravelle

M. L.

Farmer

T. W.

(2011). Issues in special education teacher recruitment, retention, and professional development: Considerations in supporting rural teachers. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 30(4), 3–11. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eax&AN=74530437&site=ehost-live

Booms

B. H.

Bitner

M. J.

(1981). Marketing strategies and organisation structure for service firms. In Donnelly

J. H.

George

W. R.

(Eds.), Marketing of services (pp. 47–51). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.

Burbank

M. D.

Bates

A. J.

Schrum

(2009). Expanding teacher preparation pathways for paraprofessionals: A recruiting seminar series. Teacher Education Quarterly, 36, 199–216. Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/44451850/expanding-teacher-preparation-pathways-paraprofessionals-recruiting-seminar-series

*Cegelka

P. A.

Alvarado

J. L.

(2000). A best practices model for preparation of rural special education teachers. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 19, 15–29. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=5420876&site=ehost-live&scope=site

*Childre

A. L.

(2014). Preparing special educators highly qualified in content: Alternative route certification for unlicensed teachers in rural Georgia. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 33, 23–31. Retrieved from http://jproxy.lib.ecu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=95753997&site=ehost-live

Dai

Sindelar

P. T.

Denslow

Dewey

Rosenberg

M. S.

(2007). Economic analysis and the design of alternative-route teacher education programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 422–439. doi:10.1177/0022487107306395

*Esposito

M. C.

Lal

(2005). Responding to special education teacher shortages in diverse urban settings: An accelerated alternative credential program. Teacher Education and Special Education, 28, 100–103. doi:10.1177/088840640502800203

10.

Gale

N. K.

Heath

Cameron

Rashid

Redwood

(2013). Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, Article 117. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-117

11.

Ivy

(2008). A new higher education marketing mix: The 7Ps for MBA marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 22, 288–299. doi:10.1108/09513540810875635

12.

*Jameson

J. M.

Mcdonnell

(2007). Going the distance to train teachers for students with severe disabilities: The University of Utah distance teacher education program. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 26(2), 26–32.

13.

*Jensen

M. C.

Churchill

Davis

(2001). Finding and keeping the best: A rural regional partnership for recruiting and retaining reachers for children with high-incidence disabilities (Final Performance Report). Chico: California State University.

14.

Johnson

E. S.

Humphrey

M. J.

Allred

K. W.

(2009). Online learning and mentors: Addressing the shortage of rural special educators through technology and collaboration. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 28(2), 17–22.

15.

*Jordan

Spooner

Calhoun

Beattie

Algozzine

Galloway

(1999). Life beyond the large city: A distance education program in learning disabilities at the University of North Carolina-Charlotte. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 18, 44–57.

16.

*Knapczyk

Chapman

Rodes

Chung

(2001). Teacher preparation in rural communities through distance education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 402–407. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/62275710?accountid=15182%5Cnhttp://sfx.scholarsportal.info/york?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ%3Aericshell&atitle=Teache

17.

*Kurtts

S. A.

Cooper

J. E.

Boyles

(2007). Project RESTART: Preparing nontraditional adult teacher education candidates to become special education teachers. Teacher Education and Special Education, 30, 223–236. doi:10.1177/088840640703000403

18.

*Larwood

(2005). A promising practice: Low incidence teacher education in rural and remote California. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24, 25–30.

19.

Lemke

J. C.

(2010). Attracting and retaining special educators in rural and small schools: Issues and solutions. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 9, 17–22.

20.

*Lemke

J. C.

Harrison

(2000). Changing paradigms: A new teacher education model for rural Hawaii. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 19, 44–49.

21.

Mason-Williams

(2015). Unequal opportunities: A profile of the distribution of special education teachers. Exceptional Children, 81, 247–262. doi:10.1177/0014402914551737

22.

*McLaren

Rutland

J. H.

(2013). Preparing early childhood special educators in Appalachian Kentucky. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 32, 46–55.

23.

National Education Association. (2018). Who are paraeducators? Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/home/67057.htm

24.

Nicolescu

(2009). Applying marketing to higher education: Scope and limits. Management & Marketing, 4(2), 35–44.

25.

*Rooks-Ellis

D. L.

(2017). The Scholars project: Maine’s distance education model for preparing early childhood special educators to work with young children with disabilities. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 36, 84–91. doi:10.1177/8756870517707926

26.

Rosenberg

M. S.

Sindelar

P. T.

(2005). The proliferation of alternative routes to certification in special education: A critical review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 117–127. doi:10.1177/00224669050390020201

27.

*Salend

S. J.

Whittaker

C. R.

Duhaney

L. M. G.

Smith

R. M.

(2003). Diversifying teacher education programs to recruit and graduate culturally and linguistically diverse teachers. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26, 315–327.

28.

Sindelar

P. T.

Dewey

Rosenberg

Corbett

Denslow

Lotfinia

(2012). Cost effectiveness of alternative route special education teacher preparation. Exceptional Children, 79, 25–42. doi:10.1177/001440291207900102

29.

Sindelar

P. T.

Pua

D. J.

Fisher

Peyton

D. J.

Brownell

M. T.

Mason-Williams

(2018). The demand for special education teachers in rural schools revisited: An update on progress. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37, 12–20. doi:10.1177/8756870517749247

30.

*Snell

M. B.

Martin

Orelove

F. P.

(1997). Meeting the demands for specialized teachers of students with severe disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 20, 221–233. doi:10.1177/088840649702000304

31.

Sutcher

Darling-Hammond

Carver-Thomas

(2016). A coming crisis in teaching? Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the U.S. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/coming-crisis-teaching

32.

Sutton

J. P.

Bausmith

S. C.

Connor

D. M. O.

Pae

H. A.

Payne

J. R.

(2014). Building special education teacher capacity in rural schools: Impact of a grow your own program. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 33(4), 14–23.

33.

Tyler

Yzquierdo

Lopez-Reyna

Flippin

(2002). Diversifying the special education workforce. Gainesville: Center on Personnel Studies in Special Education, University of Florida.

34.

Valle-Riestra

D. M.

Shealey

M. W.

Cramer

E. D.

(2011). Recruiting and retaining culturally diverse special educators. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 1, 68–88.

35.

Van Vliet

. (2011). Service marketing mix (7P’s). Toolshero. Retrieved from https://www.toolshero.com/marketing/service-marketing-mix-7ps/

36.

*White

(2004). The recruitment of paraeducators into the special education profession. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 214–218.

37.

Wilson

S. M.

Darling-Hammond

Berry

(2001). A case of successful teaching policy: Connecticut’s long-term efforts to improve teaching and learning (A research report). Retrieved from https://www.education.uw.edu/ctp/sites/default/files/ctpmail/PDFs/Connecticut-WDHB-02-2001.pdf