Erin Roderick, Ed.D

1. Perceptions of supportive leadership behaviors of school site administrators for secondary special education teachers Erin Roderick, Ed.D

2. Topic Background: History • Historically, site-based instructional leaders were not responsible for special education programs • Policies have driven the change in site administrator’s role • Special education teachers leave the field due to the lack of perceived administrative support from their principal • Type of support plays an important role in job satisfaction and effectiveness

3. Purpose for this research • Special education teachers are leaving the field at a much higher rate than general educators and the main contributing factor is a lack of administrative support. • The purpose of this research was to identify and compare specific leadership behaviors perceived as supportive by special education teachers and school site administrators.

4. Importance of the research • Obtaining specific leadership behaviors that are perceived as supportive to special education teachers will lead to how much support to provide, what support to provide, and how to retain them • A principal’s leadership behaviors are critical to successful implementation of programs for students with disabilities, which directly affect student achievement.

5. Review of the LiteratureConceptual Framework

6. Concepts Role of Instructional Leaders and Special Education • Redefine roles of instructional leaders (Boscardin, 2005) • Affect achievement through expectations, school climate, and other leadership behaviors (Cole-Henderson, 2000; Hallinger, Bickman, & Davis, 1996; Hallinger & Heck, 1998; Witzers, Bosker, & Kruger, 2003) • Professional development (DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2003) • Enhance knowledge (Valesky & Hirth, 1992)

7. Concepts (cont.) Policies That Drive Roles of Instructional Leaders • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) • No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) • Ensure the accessibility of the curriculum to all students (Boscardin, 2005)

8. Concepts (cont.) Accountability in Special Education • Leadership influences student achievement • Principal’s attitude and the achievement of students with disabilities (Idol, 2006) • Influence on student achievement • indirectly through influences • leaders use clues • understand what leaders do (Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom, 2004) • Special Education Teacher Attrition • Leave at a much higher rate (Katsiyannis, Zhang, & Conroy, 2003) • Due to lack of support

9. Concepts (cont.) Leadership Behaviors Perceived as Supportive • Types of Support • Four Dimensions: emotional, instrumental, informational, and appraisal (House, 1981; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994) • Perceptions • Support is felt through overall school culture • Built through values and actions of the principal. (Gersten, Keating, Yovanoff, & Harniss, 2001)

10. Research Questions • What leadership behaviors do special education teachers perceive as valuable administrative support? • What leadership behaviors do site administrators perceive as valued support for their special education teachers? • What is the relationship between what teachers perceive as supportive and what administrators perceive as supportive?

11. Methodology • Quantitative study utilizing a survey for data collection • Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) in a suburban area in Southern California • Made up of two unified school districts • 15 secondary schools • 95 survey respondents • 35 site administrators • 59 special education teachers

12. Specifics on Methodology Data Collection/Analysis • Online survey emailed to participants • One-way ANOVA • Descriptive statistics

13. Findings: Special Educators

14. Findings: Administrators

15. Findings: Mean differences of four domains

16. Findings: Emotional Domain

17. Findings: Instructional Domain

18. Findings: Technical Domain

19. Findings: Instrumental Domain

20. Open-ended question:What is the best thing your current administrator has done to support you this year?

21. Open-ended question:What is the one thing you wish your current administrator would do to support you?

22. Conclusions • Behaviors from emotional domain perceived as most supportive (Balfour, 2002; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; McFarland, 2009) • Difference in perceptions for three domains: • Emotional, Instructional, Technical • 22 leadership behaviors

23. Conclusions Special Education Teachers: • highest value was placed on having their decisions supported in front of other teachers and parents • Teachers want their administrator to listen to them, and give them their undivided attention • They also want to feel like what they are doing is making a difference in the organization

24. Conclusions Special Education Teachers: • The leadership behaviors reflect an importance of: • building relationships • expressing confidence • talking to and listening to each other • The emotional domain is most valued because the need for trust, reflection, and relationships are how special educators feel they are valued and supported on a school campus

25. Conclusions Open-ended questions • Responses that fell within the emotional domain had to do with: • communication between teacher and principal • the feeling of appreciation • showing an interest in what the teacher was doing in their assignment. “My administrator does a great job at making me feel that I’m doing an exceptional job of preparing my students for success”

26. Two Emerging Themes • Student accountability and the need for behavioral assistance with students. • One participant responded to the first question by stating that their administrator supports them by making students accountable for their actions. “My administrator helped me to the best of his ability through structural and behavioral crisis this year”

27. Conclusions Administrators: • Having interest in what teachers do in their classroom would be most valuable to special education teachers • Empowering special education teachers by showing interest in what they are doing and giving undivided attention when they talk were ranked the highest by administrators

28. Conclusions Administrators: • They feel that the empowering of their teachers will be more effective in showing them support because this is what they are comfortable with and have the knowledge and training to provide. Administrators are providing the type of support that they are comfortable giving.

29. Conclusions • Administrators had the higher mean scores • Teachers focus is in the classroom • Administrators must focus on all aspects of education due to the high levels of accountability for student achievement • Administrators may have ranked each of the leadership behaviors on the survey with a higher score because they feel pressure to support all programs equally, and thus have the concept of support on their mind all the time.

30. Implications • Building relationships • Expressing confidence • Talking to and listening to each other • Taking an interest into what teachers do in the classroom • Communication of confidence and respect to all staff members

31. Recommendations • Develop and practice the leadership behaviors identified as most valuable in this study • Communication • Show confidence in the decisions and actions • Listen and give teachers their undivided attention • Professional development for site administrators to enhance knowledge and beliefs • Provide the type of support that is perceived as valuable • Provide an emotionally supportive environment

32. Future Research • Include perceptions from both elementary and secondary level special education teachers and administrators • Explore the level of support site administrators receive from district level administrators • Utilize qualitative methodologies for a more detailed description of the perceptions of special education teachers and administrators • Examine perceptions of supportive leadership behaviors across multiple SELPAs and school districts

33. References Boscardin, M. L. (2005). The administrative role in transforming secondary school to support inclusive evidence-based practices. American Secondary Education, 33(3), 21-32. Cole-Henderson, B. (2000). Organizational characteristics of schools that successfully serve low-income urban African American students. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(1-2), 77-91. Dipaola, M., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003). The principalship at a crossroads: A study of the conditions and concerns of principals. NASSP Bulletin, 87(634), 43-65. Fowler, F. J. (1993). Survey research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Frankel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1996). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill. Gersten, R., Keating, T., Yovanoff, P., & Harniss, M. K. (2001). Working in special education: Factors that enhance special educators' intent to stay. Exceptional Children, 67(4), 549-567. Hallinger, P., Bickman, L., & Davis, K. (1996). School context, principal leadership, and student reading achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 96(5), 527-549. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal's contribution to school effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-191. House, J. S. (1981). Work, stress, and social support. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Idol, L. (2006). Toward inclusion of special education students in general education: A program evaluation of eight schools. Remedial & Special Education, 27(2), 77-94. Katsiyannis, A., Zhang, D., & Conroy, M. A. (2003). Availability of special education teachers: Trends and issues. Remedial and Special Education, 24(4), 246-253. Lasky, B., & Karge, B. D. (2006). Meeting the needs of students with disabilities: Experience and confidence of principals. NASSP Bulletin, 90(1), 19-36. Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement. Littrell, P. C., & Billingsley, B. S. (1994). The effects of principal support on special and general educators' stress, job satisfaction, school commitment, health, and intent to stay in teaching. Remedial & Special Education, 15(5), 297-310. Nardi, P. M. (2006). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Valesky, T. C., & Hirth, M. A. (1992). Survey of the states: Special education knowledge requirements for school administrators. Exceptional Children, 58(5), 399-406. Witzers, B., Bosker, R. J., & Kruger, M. L. (2003). Educational leadership and student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 398-424.

34. Thank you Discussion, Questions, Comments roderick.erin@gmail.com