Facilitating Engaged Scholarship for Faculty and Doctoral Students through Early Research Opportunities

1. Facilitating Engaged Scholarship for Faculty and Doctoral Students through Early Research Opportunities Jeannie Kleinhammer-Tramill Leonard Burrello Josh Barton Ann Mickelson University of South Florida

2. About this Presentation Purpose: To discuss findings from ongoing research carried out under the auspices of an OSEP Leadership Project – the FASER Project. We will discuss two sets of findings: 1. Findings from the collaborative research in schools 2. Findings from our scholars’ discussions of their experiences and preparation.

3. Purpose and Outline of Presentation Outline: • Brief overview of FASER Leadership project including plan for early, engaged research • What we learned from the research in partner schools • What we learned about partnerships for leadership development • What we learned from our doctoral students about their preparation for scholarship • Implications for doctoral preparation in special education

4. About the FASER Project • OSEP Leadership Project funded in 2009 – 2013. • Collaborative project between Departments of Special Education and Ed Leadership and Policy Studies at University of South Florida. • Goals of project included preparation of scholars with expertise in special ed. policy through early, engaged research with k-12 schools. • All scholars were engaged in one of two research projects with k-12 schools.

5. Conceptual Framework for the Research • FASER faculty (Assistant and Full Professors) and doctoral students committed to engaged scholarship (Boyer, 1990; Zeichner, 1999) in schools. • School and university partners had voice in identifying relevant research questions and interpreting findings • Researchers committed to providing useful information to the schools • Faculty mentors committed to providing early mentoring through participation in field-based research

6. Context for the Research with Partner LEA & Schools • In 2005, the district implemented an inclusive education reform (i.e. BPIE) aimed at: • Dismantling self-contained special education classrooms for students with mild to moderate LDs • Placing students with mild/moderate LDs in general education classrooms • Implementing RTI to address over-identification issues and to support student learning in general education classrooms • At the time of the initiation of the study (i.e., 2009), 75 to 76 percent of students with disabilities were being educated in general education classrooms. • The district’s director of special education identified six schools (2 elementary; 2 middle; 2 high) for case studies (Stake, 1999).

7. Overview • Six schools (2 elementary, 2 middle, and 2 high) selected by District Administration as representing exemplary and struggling sites, respectively, with regard to inclusive practices • Research teams consisting of faculty and doctoral students assigned to each level (elem., middle, high) • Similar research process initiated by each team • Mixed-methods case study methodology • Data collection methods included principal interviews, focus group interviews with teachers and parents, and classroom observations. • District-wide and Cross-Case Analysis

8. Elementary School Team Findings • Findings indicate that both schools slowly but purposefully worked towards the inclusion of almost all students. • In the process, collegial relationships developed and helped sustain momentum for inclusion over time.

9. Elementary Findings Cont…The importance of vision… • Central to this work was crafting a vision and purpose for inclusion and increasing confidence and capacity through district supported, as well as school-led professional development, including data informed decision-making and opportunities for teachers to share their craft.

10. Elementary Findings Cont…Supportive Factors to the Change Process… • Relationship building • Emerged as critical to developing the inclusive school change effort at both schools. • Essential to sustaining inclusion was the active involvement and leadership of critical mass of teachers that were committed to working collaboratively in the process on an ongoing basis. • Data informed instructional practices • Ongoing professional development focused on using data to inform decisions

11. Elementary Findings Cont…Dilemmas and challenges facing the schools… • Balancing accountability demands, budget constraints, and capacity building efforts, as well as wrestling with tensions between district-based policies and school based inclusion efforts. • District support was viewed as simultaneously supporting and constricting the move towards inclusion.

12. Elementary Findings Cont…Lessons and Suggestions • Data informed decision-making was seen as critical to sustaining the change. Therefore, one recommendation was to use a professional learning community (PLCs) format to assist teachers in implementing differentiated tiered instruction. • Multiple definitions for words like inclusion, support facilitation and co-teaching exist. Therefore, we recommend that the district work with schools to develop common understandings of these terms. • School based decision making should remain at the center of how to provide services at each school as each context is different and teacher voice and buy-in is critical to the success of any change

13. Middle School Team Findings • The qualities of inclusive practices were moderated by several factors: • The nature and quality of school programs (e.g., school-wide PBS, learning labs, looping) • The intersection of federal, state, and local education policies (e.g., IDEA, RTI, the Florida Class-Size Reduction Amendment). • The extent to which these programs were student vs. teacher-centered seemed to impact student academic and/or behavioral outcomes • The emphasis at each school site was based upon perceived needs of the general school population(s) and communities served.

14. Middle Findings Cont… • Both schools had some effective programs: “Memorial Middle School” • School-wide PBS system • End-of-year awards ceremony: Communal savoring (Positive Psychology) “Mountain Lake Middle School” • “Learning Lab” – open to all students • Structured transitional support program (self-contained to inclusion classrooms)

15. Middle Findings Cont…Lessons and Suggestions • Teachers need intentional inservice training in RTI as well as regular “coaching” from a knowledgeable member of the school staff. • Identify ways that special educators can be used to help build capacity among the general education staff who will be delivering the majority of instruction to students with disabilities. • The provision of common planning time is especially essential (and also more difficult to attain) as service delivery trends shift away from co-teach and towards support facilitation. • Provide embedded training in effective inclusive practices that are responsive to the contextual factors.

16. High School Team Findings • Faculty held more general understandings of the district vision of “helping all students to reach their highest potential.” • The emphasis on help may be limiting as it coincides with a focus on needs (supports a needs- based discourse). • An assets-based discourse can refocus the vision and support membership.

17. High Findings Cont… • There is a need for common language across the district to ensure that the district’s “vision” has common identifiers and qualifiers • Schools need to gather data to support the long-term academic success of students who participate in peer support programs

18. High Findings Cont…Lessons and Suggestions • In order for the district and its schools to develop a vision of inclusion, educators and administrators need to consider the perceptions of students. • This includes the students’ perceptions on the barriers and resources that mediate their learning and participation. • Leadership toward inclusive education needs to support new meanings about diversity, promoting inclusive practices within schools, and building connections between schools and communities.

19. Findings about Partnerships for Engaged Scholarship • Partnership formation is time intensive. • We formed agreements with K-12 districts and had their support prior to submitting the grant. • After funding, we met with district leadership to identify priority areas for research. • Gaining agreement to the research plan, negotiating details of the studies, and getting access to data was time intensive. • Not all parties agreed on the purpose of the research and the plan had to be re-negotiated. • Learning: Have the studies arranged in advance • Downside: Scholars won’t experience process of negotiation for partnership development and research approval.

20. What we Learned from Our Doctoral Students about Preparation for Scholarship • All scholars are beginning their fourth year of participation in FASER. Three have completed qualifying exams and three plan to take quals in Fall, 2012 or Spring, 2013. • Initial interests and goals for entering the Ph.D. Program have changed for two scholars and stayed the same for the remaining four. • Four scholars plan to be professors. One plans to provide leadership in the schools, and one has taken a job with a federal agency.

21. What Our Doctoral Students Learned through Engaged Research • The technical aspects of conducting human subjects research including the IRB process. • Ground rules for interactions with school districts. • How to request data from schools and diagnosing the problems within data sets. • Understanding that the context of a study in the schools is ever-changing and variation is to be expected rather than muted.

22. What Doctoral Students Learned Cont… • Collaboration is essential for success within an IHE faculty team and between the district and IHE. • Collaborative research requires an explicit communication process. • How to balance research and service. • “I frame issues and problems differently. I look more broadly and deeply and don’t jump to conclusions”.

23. What Scholars Valued about the Process • Seeing the whole process from beginning to end. • Faculty mentors modeled interactions around the research with school personnel and then allowed me to practice. • Finding critical friends in the schools and district and bringing my research into a collaborative workspace.

24. What Scholars Valued Cont… • FASER had its muddy parts – you need to get your hands dirty and engage others where they are. • Reading research is easy, but doing it revealed how frustrating it can be. • I was learning as I was doing it from the early, emerging ideas through the design. I moved from naiveté to refinement. • When you are in it, you are aware of the micro-areas right away. The macro pieces fit into a larger framework that grows larger – about the realities of schools.

25. Implications for Doctoral Preparation • Faculty first must come to value the research experience earlier and be willing mentors. • Creating an integrated and as an authentic research effort as a unifying project serves as the incubator that is inclusive of student learning tied to faculty mentoring. This is much more difficult but not impossible to do by assigning students to individual faculty research projects requiring a commitment from all to lead and coordinating a research seminar for beginning doctoral students. • Reciprocal evolving research design is required of a especially qualitative design – like a slowly developing photograph – including the emerging relationships within the team and negotiating amongst ourselves within a district or school context. • Helping student gather experience to get data sets, learning about the problems with data sets, and what to anticipate. Using data sets over and over again in research courses to really to get to know them well – fodder for developing student research skills – including working with teams of research.

26. Doctoral Research Implications • Faculty need to teach by showing that research is about engagement: • Research engages others and where they are • Owning your “voice” and seeing that voice in the research • Students can then come to hear (and appreciate) voices of others • Students must understand that the context of study is ever changing – variation is to be expected • Reading research is easier than “doing” research; doing research reveals how frustrating it really is. • Faculty mentors engaged in comprehensive case studies need to act as a sounding board: • They need to model interviews first and then have students conduct them – • They need to encourage writing papers • Students can initially write with little voice • Later they can have students start to add their voices to the research findings and see their work as more than words on a page.

27. References • Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation. • Stake, R.E. (1999). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Altamira Press. • Zeichner, K. (1999). The new scholarship in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28 (9), 4-15.