October 2020 – Special Educator e-Journal

Table of Contents

• Special Education Legal Alert. By Perry A. Zirkel
• COVID-19 Guidance and Case Law: Early Fall Update. By Perry A. Zirkel
• Buzz from the Hub
• How Early Experiences in Cognitive Development Improve Working Memory and Processing Speed Skills of Children. By Heather Dube, B.A., and Sarah Sarette, Ed.D.
• Critically Thinking about Disability: Portrait of an Introductory Special Education Course. Dr. Sarah M. Hart
• Book Reviews
  • Hacking Leadership: 10 Ways Great Leaders Inspire Learning That Teachers, Students, and Parents Love. By Carol Krigger
  • Book Review: Exploring Citizenship Leadership. By Fany Ferrufino
  • Book Review: Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff. By Elizabeth A. Moore
• Latest Employment Opportunities Posted on NASET 
• Acknowledgements

­

Special Education Legal Alert

By Perry A. Zirkel

© September 2020

This month’s update identifies recent court decisions that illustrate the significance in some cases of the parties’ course of conduct in the eyes of the ultimate adjudicator.  This balancing of reasonableness and good faith, referred to as the “equities,” includes not only the remedies, such as tuition reimbursement, but also extends with less frequent prominence, in the underlying merits, such as the determination of “free appropriate public education” and “least restrictive environment” (LRE).

To top

COVID-19 GUIDANCE AND CASE LAW: EARLY FALL UPDATE*

Special Supplement #5 – September 18, 2020

Perry A. Zirkel

© 2020

This update is the latest in a series of summaries of legal activity specific to COVID-19 issues, with the primary focus being on students with disabilities.  The full set of these special supplements are on the home page of my website, perryzirkel.com, along with links to various referenced legal guidance and decisions.

Remaining as unsettled as the pandemic, the primary two-part question arising under the IDEA and Section 504 as a result of COVID-19 continues to be: (a) has the district denied FAPE to the eligible child and, if so, (b) what is the resulting relief, typically but not exclusively in the form of compensatory education?  Additionally, an interim but significant issue has emerged—upon parental filing for a due process hearing on such pandemic-related issues, what is the “stay-put”? 

Further Federal Guidance

The USDE guidance during the most recent month has dropped to a negligible level, with the latest issuance limited to ESSA assessments for students generally.  Specifically, on September 3, Secretary DeVos sent a letter to chief state school officers warning not to expect waivers for ESSA summative assessments for the 2020–21 school year.  She expressed receptivity to adjustment in the manner of administration but not in repeating this past year’s waiver of these assessments.

State Administrative Decisions

State Complaints.  Since my last special supplement, state complaints filings have increased, and at least three decisions have been issued.

A South Dakota state complaints decision on August 7 concluded in relevant part that the district’s change from in-person to remote delivery in response to the state’s closure of public schools did not constitute a unilateral change in placement and that the district—with a limited exception—did not materially fail to implement the student’s IEP via distance learning.  The exception was for the first day of ESY.  The corrective action for this violation was compensatory education, which will be (a) via distance learning or in-person depending on the IEP team’s determination, and (b) provided before the start of the school year unless the parents are not reasonably able to do so within that time limited time period.  

An August 12 state complaints decision in Texas concluded that each of the three students at issue was not entitled to compensatory education, per the respective IEP team determinations. The reason was that the district made reasonable efforts that resulted in progress, thus not denying FAPE.  The circumstances included the partial lack of parental cooperation in two of the three cases.  

An August 21 state complaints decision in Indiana found various pandemic-related claims unsubstantiated with a limited exception, the provision of periodic progress reports.  The corrective action for this violation was in-service training and a documenting system for these reports.  Otherwise, the conclusions were that during the school closure and resulting distance learning, the district sufficiently implemented the student’s IEP during the school closure and, per state law, provided the student with the variety of educational services and programs that the school made available to nondisabled students.

An August 24 state complaints decision in Virginia, which is on appeal, similarly found no violation for a systemic complaint against a large school district’s use of voluntary distance learning plans as a result of the statewide closure of schools.  More specifically, the conclusions included that (a) the district’s “voluntary distance learning initiative was reasonably based on federal and state guidance providing flexibility to school [districts] during the extended closure period,” and (b) these temporary learning plans did not constitute amendments to the students’ IEPs, thus not requiring PWNs or parental consent.  

Due Process Hearings.  Although similarly increasing in filings, the due process hearing avenue thus far has yielded fewer decisions.  The primary examples were two California hearing officer decisions, both issued on August 24.

In the Los Angeles Unified School District decision, the hearing officer concluded that the student’s distance learning plan delivered, at most, a third of the 1570 minutes per week of services specified in the IEP, with the shortfall in community-based vocational services particularly affecting her progress, thus constituting a material failure of implementation.  For the second and separate issue, however, the hearing officer found that the district formulation and delivery of transition services included a limited procedural violation that did not result in substantive loss to the student, thus not amounting to denial of FAPE.  The remedy for the first issue was compensatory education, specifically for the district to “fund a total of 40 hours of postsecondary transition counseling by an appropriately-credentialed counselor of Parent’s choice.”  

In the Pleasanton Unified School District decision, the hearing officer granted the parent’s stay-put motion for essential related services at home based on “close as possible” approach, with the feasibility finding based on (a) the implementation of compensatory education related services at home during the pandemic pursuant to a separate state complaints decision related services, and (b) the lack of any prohibition for such in-person at-home services in state guidance.  

Court Actions

Court lawsuits, and to a much more limited extent court decisions, have continued at a more active and publicly visible basis.

The lawsuits since those reported in supplement #4 are as follows:

•   Aug. 7: Wilkes v. Wash. State Bd. of Educ. (Wash Super. Ct.) – challenge to governor’s order providing for “continuous learning plans” for full funding, thus waiving full instruction for all, including but not limited to special education, students

•   Aug. 21: C.M. v. Jara (D. Nev.) – class action FAPE (especially failure-to-implement) claim against Clark County School District, using “spaghetti” litigation strategy and including requested funding reallocation to parents

•   Sept. 2 and 14: J.T. v. de Blasio (S.D.N.Y.) – successive, rather blistering show cause orders against the plaintiff law firm requiring expedited justification for fulfillment of jurisdiction, venue, and related procedural prerequisites

The court decisions since my August 12 supplement are as follows:

•   Aug. 20: M.G. v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ. (S.D.N.Y.) – granted parent’s motion to amend its pre-pandemic FAPE suit for alleged violation of hearing officer’s order for 2019-20 school year and for delay in appointing a hearing officer for 2020-21 due process hearing complaint   

• Aug. 21 and 26: Wash. v. DeVos (W.D. Wash.)  and Mich. v. DeVos (N.D. Cal.) -granted preliminary injunction, based on Administrative Procedures Act, against interim rule for apportionment of CARES funding for private schools

• Aug. 24: Fla. Educ. Ass’n v. De Santis (Fla. Cir. Ct.) – granted preliminary injunction, based on state constitutional provision for safe schools, striking arbitrary and capricious provisions of governor’s funding-based order for full in-person instruction – stay upon expedited appeal (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Aug. 27)

• Sept. 1: L.A. v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ. (S.D.N.Y.): granted stay-put order for continued placement at private school (which closed during pandemic)   

• Sept. 4: NAACP v. DeVos (D.D.C.) – granted permanent injunction, based on Administrative Procedures Act, against interim rule for apportionment of CARES funding for private schools

• Sept. 10: Killoran v. Westhampton Beach Sch. Dist. (E.D.N.Y.) – denied preliminary injunction based on stay-put and alternately on balance of equities for settlement agreement upon closure of library

Continuing Conclusion

Again, the state of the law, like that for the resumption of schools, continues to be a rather fluid and largely indefinite picture that warrants the continued resiliency and creative cooperation of both special educators and parents.  While awaiting more definitive answers, the thrust of the legal activity to date specific to special education appears to be on stay-put and failure-to-implement claims.   The decisions to date range from adjusted to strict conceptions of FAPE, and the awards of compensatory education have been relatively limited.

To top

Buzz from the Hub

All articles below can be accessed through the following links:

www.parentcenterhub.org/buzz-august2020-issue2/

https://www.parentcenterhub.org/buzz-august2020-issue1/

https://www.parentcenterhub.org/buzz-july2020-issue1/

https://www.parentcenterhub.org/buzz-june2020-issue2/

Voter Resource Center
The American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD)’s REV UP Campaign is designed to increase the voting power of the disability community while also engaging candidates and the media on disability issues. The resource center connects voters with disabilities and others with an amazing array of info and guides to support their participation in voting.

OSEP Policy Letter to Anonymous
Can a parent be required to sign a confidentiality agreement in order to participate in mediation under Part B of the IDEA?

OSEP Fast Facts | Race and Ethnicity
Two new Fast Facts from OSEP take a closer look at IDEA’s 618 data for American Indian or Alaska Native children with disabilities and for Black or African American students with disabilities. The fast facts reported include data on child count, educational environments, discipline, and exiting.

Fighting the Big Virus Children’s Book
(Also available in Spanish, simplified Chinese, Finnish, Portuguese, and Mandarin)
The National Child Traumatic Stress Network developed this children’s book, to help young children and families talk about their experiences and feelings about COVID-19 and the need to shelter in place.

10 Kids’ Books That Star Protagonists with Special Needs
These 10 books are just some of the many options that feature kids with special needs (and their siblings) fighting crime, solving mysteries, navigating school, loving each other, making friends, and just being awesome.

Transition Guide to Postsecondary Education and Employment for Students and Youth with Disabilities
This OSERS transition guide will help students and youth with disabilities and their families to better understand how state education agencies, local education agencies, and vocational rehabilitation agencies work together to facilitate improved outcomes for students and youth with disabilities.

100 Things Students Can Create To Demonstrate What They Know
Because variety is the spice of life!

6 Tips for Keeping Kids Motivated for Online Learning
This 2-minute video (also available in Spanish) gives helpful tips and techniques to encourage and motivate your kids during virtual lessons in what promises to be a very unusual school year.

Types of Strengths in Kids
Children have many different kinds of strengths. Recognizing and talking about these strengths can help your child thrive. This is especially true for kids who are struggling in school. Use this list to help identify your child’s strengths.

Planning for Equity and Inclusion: A Guide to Reopening Schools
COVID-19 has changed public education in dramatic ways, and the 2020–2021 school year is posing even more challenges. This short guide shares specific ways school and district leaders can prioritize equity and inclusion as they rethink their approach to public education in the COVID-19 world.

Building Engagement with Distance Learning
This resource is part of an ongoing series produced by the OSEP-funded TIES Center. It provides a framework for supporting all students, including those with significant cognitive disabilities. The series explores important considerations in providing distance learning, such as daily meetings, behavioral supports, individualizing supports for students, data collection, and embedding instruction at home.

A Guide to Equity in Remote Learning
This guide emerges from the ongoing webinar series Advancing Equity in an Era of Crisis, a collaborative effort of several professional organizations in California (e.g., California Association of African-American Superintendents and Administrators). The 63-page guide examines how California can equitably meet the needs of all students when it resumes instruction in the 2020-21 school year, whether in classrooms, remotely, or a hybrid of both. Much food for thought here, even if California isn’t where you live.

Testing for COVID-19: What’s Your State’s Plan?
The Department of Health and Human Services has posted the COVID testing plans (July through December) from all states, territories, and localities. The plans include details on responding to surges in cases and reaching vulnerable populations.

Talking to Very Young Children about Race
This 4-page resource is subtitled “It’s necessary now, more than ever.” Why? Because children see injustices on the news, at the store, on the playground, and in their classrooms. It is important for adults to explain to them what is going on in a way that makes sense based on their developmental level. These conversations need to become a pattern during the early childhood years and not a single event. Excellent, subtle suggestions are given. From the National Center for Pyramid Model Innovations.

Anti-Racism Resource Directory for Families: Resources for Multiple Grade Levels
Parents may not know where to start with discussions of race, racial justice, and anti-racism with their children. Or perhaps they’ve already had family conversations and are looking to continue the discussion or explore action. This Learning Heroes directory assists families as they navigate the many free resources that are available.

The Ultimate Parents’ Guide to Summer Activity Resources
To give parents a sense of the summertime fun can be had, the Washington Post compiled resources in 10 categories: reading, education, travel, mental wellness, music, art, physical activity, theater and dance, languages, and entertainment.

Parent Advocacy Toolkit for Equity in Use of COVID-19 Funds
NCLD and 13 partner organizations released recommendations to guide how the use of funding can prioritize equity and ensure our most vulnerable students receive the greatest support. Based on these recommendations, NCLD also created a 12-page toolkit to help parents advocate for equity as school districts develop reopening plans for the 2020-2021 school year.

COVID-19 Planning Considerations: Guidance for School Re-entry
This guidance from the American Academy of Pediatrics supports education, public health, local leadership, and pediatricians collaborating with schools in creating policies for school re-entry that foster the overall health of children, adolescents, staff, and communities and are based on available evidence.

Special Report | How We Go Back to School
To reopen schools in the fall, K-12 leaders must balance three critical, often competing responsibilities: the health and safety of their people, the role their schools play in the larger community, and the effective teaching of their students. To help district and school leaders navigate these monumental decisions, Education Week lays out the big challenges ahead and some solutions in an 8-part series.

Spanish-Language Webinar on the Transition to Kindergarten Amid COVID-19
The transition into kindergarten marks a major milestone in a child’s life. The ED-funded Early Learning Network presents this 33-minute webinar specifically designed for Spanish speaking families to help families prepare their child for a successful transition into kindergarten during the pandemic.

The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse
Funded by HHS, this clearinghouse disseminates current research and innovative strategies to encourage and strengthen fathers and families. Many resources are also available in Spanish.

What’s Important to Native Youth?
Do you know? Find out in the infographic and brief developed to summarize the findings of a survey of Native youth and what they had to say. It will certainly inform your outreach to and work with youth.

Reinforcing Resilience: How Parent Centers Can Support American Indian and Alaska Native Parents
Considering the traumas that indigenous peoples have survived all these years and the current challenges they face, resilience is an essential quality to have. Here’s how Parent Centers can add value and vigor to an essence that has historically been integral in Native life.

Bouncing Back from Setbacks: A Message for American Indian and Alaska Native Youth
This brief is written directly to Native youth, as if it were a letter coming from the local Parent Center. It highlights 10 skills known to be builders of resilience in youth. Also available online in HTML.

We hope you enjoy the multicultural journey that all of the resources in Working with Native Children and Youth will take you on!

Will Your Schools Re-Open? What’s the Plan, Stan?
Johns Hopkins University has launched a new tracker that analyzes school reopening plans across the country. The tool examines whether or not each state reopening plan addresses a dozen different issues. You can also download state plans directly from the tracker. How timely, eh?

2020 Determination Letters on State Implementation of IDEA
How well are the states and territories implementing IDEA? The 2020 determination letters will tell you. (Can you guess who received the “needs intervention” determination for the ninth year in a row?!)

Comparison Guide: Video Conferencing Tools for Your Nonprofit
As nonprofits continue to do their work remotely, the need for a solid video conferencing tool has never been greater. TechSoup created this at-a-glance guide to help nonprofits make informed decisions about choosing what’s right for their organization.

Tech Soup Courses for Free!
TechSoup has also created a free track of courses to provide information and tools as nonprofits scale up the work they do remotely, including having necessary tech tools, how to boost collaboration, and how to ensure information security.

Camp Kinda
(In English and Spanish) | Here’s a free, virtual summer camp experience designed to keep kids engaged, asking questions, and having fun even while they’re stuck at home. “Open” each weekday starting June 1 to September 1. On any given day, kids may be exploring the art of graphic novels, unlocking the mysteries of history, or jumping into the world’s craziest sports. Also available in Spanish.

How to Support Your Unique, Quirky Child
(In English and Spanish) | When your child behaves differently from others, it’s endearing—but is it OK? Read this Great Schools article to find ways to celebrate your child’s unique nature. A version in Spanish is also available: Cómo apoyar las características únicas de tu hijo.

Video | The CDC Guidance on Reopening Schools, Explained
CDC recently released guidance on reopening schools. Its recommendations, which are voluntary, give parents and teachers their first detailed glimpse of how schools might change their operations to contain COVID-19. How much these recommendations will influence schools’ operations depends on the decisions of state and local leaders. Watch Education Week’s 4-minute video for an explanation of several key points.

SAVE the DATE | Webinar on Monday, June 8th @ 3 pm EDT
Safeguarding Back to School: Principles to Guide a Healthy Opening to Classrooms During COVID-19
The transition back to school this year will be unlike any in history. How do we safely reopen? In this edWebinar, leaders of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and Brooklyn Laboratory Charter Schools will discuss key questions we must all consider as we begin the journey back to school–from the school bus ride to the dismissal bell. Register here. If you’d like to receive an email with a link to the recording afterwards, add your name to the list at: https://forms.gle/V6mgSp8n8fqxjv318

To top

Critically Thinking about Disability: Portrait of an Introductory Special Education Course

Dr. Sarah M. Hart

University of Hartford

Abstract

Perspectives on the meaning and nature of disability are multifaceted. This study focused on the development of undergraduate students’ critical thinking skills. The aim was to impact their ability to articulate a nuanced and personally relevant conceptualization of disability and apply this knowledge within the educational field. In this practitioner inquiry, pre– and post– assessments of student writings from an introductory course in special education were taken over three academic years. Evidence indicated enhanced critical thinking skills through pedagogical course activities that are shared in this paper. Critical engagement and reflection are essential skills not only for the foundational years of undergraduate study, but also for teacher training, and practices as future teachers. Through careful examinations of teaching and learning in higher education classrooms, the instructor self-reflects on the power of instruction and its potential to impact work with students with special learning needs.

Keywords: critical thinking, disability and identity, introductory special education coursework

Critically Thinking about Disability: Portrait of an Introductory Special Education Course

 A clear definition of disability is useful to provide a boundary for understanding policy, scope of legislation, and eligibility for services. Yet disability is a complex concept, and there are historical, social, legal, and philosophical influences on its interpretation. One example of this complexity from the field of education is the shift away from individually-targeted practices of special education to focus on inclusive education (Oyler, 2011). Since the 1980s, emphasis has been placed on the multifaceted systems and processes that ensure every student thrives across a diverse array of learning environments.

Undergraduate, introductory, special education courses do not consistently match these contemporary shifts in complexity. Typically designed as survey courses, objectives in introductory coursework focus on defining various disability labels, and reviewing them with attention to etiology, programming, and curriculum modifications aligned with state and federal legislation. This style of instruction has been critiqued for perpetuating deficit assumptions of disability by primarily concentrating on assessments and eligibility for services (Freedman, Applebaum, Woodfield, & Ashby, 2019). Students taking introductory special education courses are asked to form judgments about the meaning of disability and its educational implications before they have a comprehensive appreciation of what it truly means. Flexibility is needed to expand beyond this narrow way of thinking (Sharp & Goode, 2019). “Many pre-service teachers in special education courses are neither critical of underlying messages with which [disability] labels are inscribed, nor are they conscious of the nuanced ways in which those labels function to create regimes of fitness among students in schools” (Mutua & Smith, 2006, p.  125). The complexity, elasticity, and diversity of disability will likely not have been fully considered by students early on in an undergraduate’s program of study and requires time for critical reflection before students move on to teacher certification programs. 

Fostering students’ complex conceptualization of disability is challenging to achieve, especially for those students who are unsure how to move beyond a deficit-based understanding of disability (Ashby, 2012). Ferri (2006) noted that curricular restrictions are often imposed by accreditation for teacher certification programs. Relatedly, researchers noted that the Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA) used as part of teacher certification in some States requires teacher candidates to use deficit-focused discourse and language to demonstrate proficiency within the assessment (Bacon & Blachman, 2017). Additionally, few education textbooks critically examine perspectives of disability. Models for how to effectively integrate complex considerations of disability within entrenched curriculums are scarce, and oftentimes there are few allied colleagues to ask for support. Despite the challenges, a need exists to develop “critical special education” (Ware, 2005, p. 104). Development of undergraduates’ critical thinking skills may be relevant in this pursuit.

Critical thinking

“Critical thinking is the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improvement…It is not problem-solving, but asking good questions (Paul & Elder, 2006b, p. 76). Considered “good thinking and thinking well” (Pithers & Soden, 2000, p. 237), a well-cultivated capacity to critically think often includes: the ability to raise and articulate vital questions, gather and assess relevant information, think open-mindedly about assumptions, implications, and alternatives, and communicate solutions to complex problems (Paul & Elder, 2006b). Critical thinking is considered an important life skill and general societal asset by policymakers, employers, and pertinent to this paper, university educators. Over 99% of university faculty state that critical thinking is an essential aspect of their teaching and that universities are responsible to encourage the critical thinking skills of their students (Huber & Kuncel, 2016).

There is a growing argument that teacher education coursework should prepare pre-service teachers, or teacher candidates, to understand, critique, and adapt to changes that occur over the course of their careers (Mariano & Figliano, 2019). All of these attributes require critical thinking skills. When learned during teacher training, critical thinking skills have been found to transfer into critically interpreted instruction and development of skills within the classroom (Yang, 2012). Little is known, however, about the impacts of critical thinking on teacher training programs, and their potential application to the field of special and/or inclusive education. Past studies have focused on critical thinking as an essential part of the rigorous mentorship of teacher candidates (Zascavage et al., 2007), though this study was conducted outside of the US. One tangentially related study conducted within the US found that self-evaluation of instructional design enabled the development of critical thinking skills and that this process improved the quality of preservice teachers’ instruction (Etscheidt et al., 2012).

Students can have well-developed critical thinking skills, yet still be unable to directly apply those skills to think about wider issues of inequity and injustice from a systemic perspective (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). A long history exists of calling teachers’ attention to crossing cultural boundaries (e.g., Pugach & Seidl, 1998). A teacher’s critical awareness of diverse cultural identities can determine the success of their students in school. Critical thinking skills may therefore be applied to establish the intersections between disability, identity, and diversity. Pre-service teachers should develop critical thinking skills to advance their ability to understand varying views of normalcy, disability, and to recognize and eliminate conceptions that result in inequalities for some and privilege for others (Danforth & Naraian, 2015).

The study depicted in this paper investigates the development of critical thinking skills of pre-service special education teachers to promote nuanced and personally relevant conceptualization of disability. Grappling with the challenges and contradictions of disability, labeling, and identity early on in students’ teacher training may lay important foundations for self-reflection. Students can use critical thinking as a foundational skill to increase their engagement in other complex issues. Introductory coursework on special education may be one of the few opportunities to consider these complex issues related to disability before teacher training coursework begins on specific content and pedagogical knowledge. Important insights are offered into the cultivation of critical thinking for undergraduate students who plan to work with school students with or without disabilities.

Portrait of a Course

The practitioner inquiry presented in this paper focused on a deep investigation of one course taught over three academic years. The introductory special education course was required for all students who declared a major or minor in education. The course was considered a gateway towards application into all education professional programs. Only courses taught by the author of this paper were the focus of the study. The rationale for this decision was to closely examine the introductory course, and for the instructor to use the method of practitioner inquiry to reflect and improve on pedagogical critical thinking activities that will be presented as portraits in this section of the paper.

The course instructor and author was awarded a critical thinking fellowship, which facilitated skills in critical thinking content and the ability to embed the development of such skills within the introductory course. The instructor operated from an open-ended definition of disability informed from multiple perspectives (i.e., medical, social, cultural, capability). It is worth noting that tensions exist within the field of special education, which has traditionally operated from a more clinical perspective that remediates at the individual-level. With a move towards more inclusive education, a social perspective has been applied to focus attention on disability rights, activism, and social change in education. The instructor was committed to foster critical connections about the role that teachers can play to address these tensions, with applications to important educational aspects such as misidentification of students with disabilities and overrepresentation of certain cultural backgrounds within special education.    

A close examination of the course and pedagogical activities that made an impact on fostering students’ critical thinking skills are now presented. This section is used to provide reflections and descriptions of the texts, classroom activities, and assignments that enabled the development of students’ critical thinking. Of note, one of the simplest, yet most effective way to promote critical thinking skills was to make it an overt class priority. This was achieved in a few ways. On the first day of class, students were introduced to both course objectives as well as the preliminary understandings of critical thinking. An addendum to the course syllabus was distributed that described the purpose of critical thinking and allocated regularly scheduled opportunities for activities and critical reflection. These adjustments provided a clear delineation between time for content delivery, and then critical engagement with the delivered content. After learning about teaching strategies for students with hearing impairments, for example, the class reexamined and extended their knowledge through the consideration of underlying assumptions and values in Deaf-culture. Namely, the devaluation of sign language as a fully effective means of communication due to an overemphasis on the spoken word. 

After time and space were allocated within the course, another foundational priority was to co-create the class’s working definition of critical thinking. A range of different definitions were presented and this enabled students to see the variety, elasticity, and applicability to a wider range of academic fields. The definition settled on was “reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do” (Paul & Elder, 2006b, p. 17). This definition is directly related to the special education field as it represented the active role of educators within collaborative teams (e.g., Individualized Education Program planning, Planning and Placement Team evaluations). This definition also highlighted the critical connections between what a teacher believes, including what has informed that way of thinking, and their actions taken in the field.

A critical thinking rubric was introduced to the class (see Association of American Colleges and Universities, 1996, Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric). This rubric was used as the assessment tool for students and the instructor to track critical thinking skill development. As part of the course, each discrete rubric criterion was individually taught and rehearsed. The critical thinking rubric formed the spine of critical thinking activities throughout the class. Aligned with the rubric criteria, students developed abilities to: (a) apply theory to practice (conceptual model activity); (b) assess and analyze others’ perspectives (writing assessment activity); (c) develop and evaluate personal understandings (debate and children book creation).  Each pedagogical activity is described in more detail.

In the conceptual model activity, five approaches to define disability were introduced: medical, social, cultural, normative, and economic. Students were grouped into one of the five models with support materials provided to deepen their understanding of their assigned topic. Collaboratively, each group used their assigned model of disability as a lens to define disability. Within their particular lens, they were asked to assign a referent label and include an example linked to media or popular culture. For example, students related the normative model of disability to a bell curve. They defined disability within this label as individuals falling within or outside a normal range with varying severity. The term exceptionality, commonly used as a replacement term for disability, was noted for continuing to differentiate others as existing outside of the norm. Examples spoke to contemporary popular television shows that inflate the exceptionality of disability when central characters have, for example, beyond average scientific, artistic, or medical abilities.

In the writing assessment activity, students developed their analytic skills to distinguish, examine, contract, and deduce (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). As students increased their familiarity with the critical thinking rubric, they assessed writing samples provided by the instructor. The writing samples were directly related to the course content topic at the time. For example, on the topic of autism, students assessed an opinion piece written by the president of the Autism Science Foundation on non-verbal and Alternative and Augmentative Communication. Later in the semester, the same rubric was used to conduct peer and self-assessments of different pieces of writing. Importantly, students first had the opportunity to develop their rubric assessment skills using anonymous and less-personal pieces of writing, before they assessed others in the class or themselves.

Two activities were noteworthy for their development of higher-order critical thinking abilities to evaluate, judge, decide, debate, create, invent, compose, design, and formulate. The debate activity is more accurately described as a constructive academic controversy (Johnson et al., 2014). A topic was selected, for example, over-diagnosis of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Teams of four were established, with two teammates for (or agreeing, ADHD is over-diagnosed) and the other two teammates against (or disagreeing, ADHD is not over-diagnosed). Teams were given time to establish their position. Then, each team presented their position without interruption to the opposing half of their group. The key distinction of a constructive academic controversy is the end goal, which is to establish a common ground and look for similarities within arguments that could form the basis for collaboration and next steps. The activity enabled students to creatively apply critical thinking skills towards collaborative problem-solving.

Finally, the children’s storybook creation activity facilitated students’ personalization of their content knowledge. Students used their reading and class notes on a topic, for example, Emotional Behavioral Disabilities (EBD). They selected one negative stereotype and one positive attribute commonly associated with this disability label then created a fictional character and plot to illustrate. The plot demonstrated how positive attributes of EBD could supersede negative stereotypes. In writing for the audience of children, undergraduate students could see this and other special education topics in new ways. For example, one student wrote,

Between 30 – 50% of youth in correctional facilities are individuals with disabilities. Of that group, 42% have EBD (IDEA, 2004, cited in the textbook, p. 233). Some might assume that people in prison are tough and mean. However, internalizing behaviors associated with EBD (for example, depression, being teased, fears) demonstrate personal sensitivity, insecurity, and vulnerability. Internalizing behaviors associated with EBD challenge the idea that all students with EBD demonstrate criminal behaviors that are tough and mean.

Pages from two students’ children’s books are provided (with permission) as exemplars (see Figure). Each example illustrates the student’s ability to acknowledge their assumptions and consider alternative or expanded ways of thinking. Examination of the effectiveness of these activities and the impacts they had on students is described in the Findings section. Before this, data collection methods of this practitioner inquiry are first described.

Method

The research question guiding this study assessed the impacts and effectiveness of developing the critical thinking skills of pre-service special education teachers to demonstrate nuanced and personally relevant conceptualizations of disability. Systematic evaluation occurred through the stages of practitioner inquiry (Hulme, Lewin, & Lowden, 2011). Data were gathered at the start and end of each of three academic semesters in two ways. First, pre- and post- testing through a written prompt enabled students and the instructor to compare progress over time. Second, student course evaluations served as evidence of students’ perspectives on the effectiveness of critical thinking within the course.

Setting and participants

The private University in Northeastern, US where this study occurred has approximately 5000 undergraduate students. The study received exempt institutional review permission. Student data was anonymized then taken from three semesters of coursework across three academic years, with between 20 to 25 students per course section for a total of 63 students included in the study. To ensure from any potential risks of confidentiality, demographic data (e.g., age, gender, race/ethnicity, possible disability diagnosis) was not collected. Anecdotally, many of the students originated from States in the Northeast and were predominantly female (e.g., two male students in a class of 20 was common). Most students in the introductory special education course subsequently applied to professional education programs (i.e., Special Education, Elementary, Early Childhood, Music, and/or Secondary Education). However, students were not tracked after course completion, so data was not directly collected on enrollments.

Data collection

Critical thinking was intended to enable students to examine varying theoretical views on a range of exceptionalities, and to interrelate all aspects of the course (e.g., readings, lectures, online/in-class discussions, clinical fieldwork experiences) to inform their perspectives. These objectives were itemized in the course syllabus. They were assessed through two written assignments (pre- and post-testing), at the start and end of the semester, which followed the same writing prompt, “When I hear the term disability I think…”

A critical thinking rubric (described in the portraits of a course section) was the structured assessment tool used by the instructor and students to assess these pieces of writing. The five rubric criteria included: explanation of issues, evidence, context / assumptions, student perspective / hypothesis, and conclusions (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 1996). Rating criteria were listed for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. There were four numeric assessment rankings possible – Capstone (4), Milestone (3 & 2), and Benchmark (1). The critical thinking rubric was created by national teams of faculty, and its transdisciplinary usability and transferability across assignments was validated (Finley, 2011).

As part of the final exam for the introductory special education course, students self-assessed both of their critical thinking paper assignments from the start and end of the semester. Before seeing student self-assessments, the instructor also assessed student’s writings. Student writings were submitted via learning management software. A feature was enabled that made all student identities anonymous during the process of ratings. The instructor’s critical thinking assessment was not shared with the student. Simultaneous with rubric rankings, excerpt narratives were collected by the instructor to illustrate student writing at each of the four rubric assessment ranking levels.

Student input was also collected via course evaluations. Quantitative feedback was solicited by asking students to rate their response to the prompt, “critical thinking was an important part of the course.” Responders over the three years rated 4.3 out of 5 in agreement. Qualitative feedback was requested via the open-ended prompt, “What are your thoughts or suggestions about the critical thinking parts of this class?”  

Data Analysis

Content analysis (Neuendorf, 2016) guided analytic procedures. Parameters were set to analyze mixed quantitative and qualitative data. The first unit of analysis was the scores that were quantified across performance levels on the critical thinking rubric. As indicated in the Table, scores were aggregated into percentages for the class and were compared across the instructor and students. Trends were interpreted by the instructor to determine patterns where students exceeded or were challenged within specific rubric categories. 

Another unit of analysis was the students’ written assignments. Exemplar quotations that illustrated critical thinking at each rubric performance ranking level were used to set each category-level. Further analysis was conducted on the course evaluations. Student narrative evaluation feedback was coded to group similarly themed feedback. Together, the patterns and development of undergraduate students’ critical thinking skills were understood. 

Findings

The most apparent result from the quantitative assessment ratings was a noticeable improvement in whole class performance in critical thinking from first to second writing assignments (see Table). Critical engagement in pedagogical activities, such as the ones described in the course portrait, enabled students to deepen their understanding and articulate practical applications. Qualitative data both confirmed and provided exemplar illustrations of those developments. 

In initial student writings (paper #1), definitions of disability were most often at a benchmark or emerging level. Students oftentimes reflected a deficit focus, such as, “When I think about the word disability I think about anything that hinders a person’s day or life. Disabilities can be major or minor, but they can also be a temporary or permanent issue” (student reflection assignment #1). Writings also provided a simplistic or narrowly focused argument, for example, “When I think of disability, I think of those students who are just the same as everyone else” (student reflection assignment #1).

Student papers at an intermediate performance level commonly offered an aspirational tone to their writing, but their ideas for implementation were not fully formed. For example,

When I hear the term disability I think about …how society has seemingly made it impossible … to lead an uninterrupted or unjudged life. Disabilities are a reality and as a society, we need to become more tolerant and accepting, something I hope to emphasize in my classroom as a special education teacher (student reflection assignment #2).

Some student writing remained at this emergent-level while other students demonstrated more sophisticated and critically examined ideas in their writing.

Assignments written at the mastery or capstone level were most commonly found in the second assignment (paper #2). After completing the course, students’ ability to critically examine a nuanced understanding of disability was evident even in initial assignment titles. Paper titles included, for example, “Different Abilities” and “(Dis)Abilities.” Other narrative examples demonstrated a diverse understanding of disability. Student’s writings featured flexibility, a breaking of a rigid binary between ability and disability. Student narratives at the mastery and capstone level also offered implementation suggestions and actions for change. For instance,

If we continuously differentiate between disabled and non-disabled we cheat people out of the opportunity of leading a life they want to live. … By integrating classrooms and offering inclusive education to all students we remove stigmas and make the students in each classroom feel a part of a community (student reflection assignment #2). 

Returning to the first paper assignment, a closer examination of rubric rating criteria revealed that students mostly struggled with providing sufficient evidence to support their examination of disability and related concepts. When evidence was provided, it was typically without comprehensive analysis, evaluation, and interpretation. In the second paper assignment, however, no specific rubric criterion stood out as substantially different or challenging for the class as a whole. 

One unexpected finding was the alignment between student and instructor rubric assessments in the second paper assignment that was not present in the first. This occurred within all three waves of data collection. One suggestion for this occurrence might be the shared understanding of critical thinking that developed between the instructor and students over the semester. Thinking at this critical level may be a collaborative and deeply interpersonal process. A further unexpected finding is demonstrated through the following student evaluation feedback, “I loved critical thinking! It helped me learn the material better than just reading the textbook and writing down notes.” As this student noted, it might be that critical thinking not assists in the development of complex thinking, but also the ability to grasp course concepts.

Discussion

Critical thinking is considered a vital foundational skill for undergraduate learning (Huber & Kuncel, 2016). Ability to critically think and analyze remains essential to students’ shifts roles into teacher training (Yang, 2012), and more specifically, special education teacher training (Zascavage et al., 2007). This study found that teaching critical thinking skills in introductory special education coursework can expand undergraduate students’ understanding of disability and application to special education-related practice. The pedagogical portraits of critical thinking were effective in facilitating students’ considerations of the complexity, elasticity, and diversity of disability (Brune & Wilson, 2013).

Students’ ability to think critically enables them to break with rigid binaries often associated with disability, such as normal and abnormal, medical and social models, even simply, ability and disability. Students’ narrative papers illustrated expanded, more fluid thinking (Danforth & Naraian, 2015). That is ‘problems’ and ‘impairments’ can stem as much, if not more so, from beliefs, biases, and people’s ability to be open-minded and accepting.

One unanticipated finding was the similarity in critical thinking rubric assessment data between instructor and students in the written assignment at the end of the course that was not apparent at the start of the course. Critically engaging in thinking and conversations surrounding disability may have enabled the thinking of the students and instructor to align. Partnerships in learning appear to have been formed, though future research may examine this phenomenon more closely.

Another unanticipated finding that was not within the scope of this study was students’ ability to retain course knowledge due to enhanced critical thinking skills. Future research may examine changes in course test scores, for example, to note any shifts as critical thinking skills develop. It is also pertinent to pay more attention to undergraduate students’ backgrounds. It may be that some students have more experience than others with both disability and critical thinking.  Additionally, the extent to which students apply these critical thinking skills in their future coursework and professional practice could also be examined. Suggested future applications might include critical engagement in undergraduate and teacher education coursework, and most importantly, when working in schools. Collaborative work and professional associations may also be positively impacted.

Limitations

Some limitations of this study should be noted. First, the sample of participating students came from one university in Northeastern United States. Student demographic data was not collected. While no information is known about students’ race and socioeconomic status, for instance, students in these introductory special education courses were predominantly female, nearly 95% of the class or more. However, this was representative of education courses at the university.

Data were collected across three academic years, however, not every section of the introductory special education course was surveyed. Therefore, no other courses were used to form a basis for comparison. Only courses taught by the author and instructor were invited to take part in the study. The rationale for this decision was to closely examine the introductory course, and for the instructor to use the method of practitioner inquiry to reflect and improve on pedagogical critical thinking activities such as the ones presented as portraits in this paper.

Conclusion

This study investigated the critical thinking development of pre-service special education teachers early in their undergraduate education. Portraits of pedagogical activities were shared to illustrate ways that students grappled with disability, labeling, and identity, and in the process enabled them to refine their perspectives. A nuanced understanding of disability was applied to collaborative discussions with classmates, course content, and field experiences.

Student evaluations of critical thinking course components stated, “I thought that [critical thinking] was helpful for application and adding to my own thoughts. It also taught me the differences in the way everyone thinks. It helped to see the other points of view.” In teacher education programs a critically examined understanding of disability can serve as an important foundation to build program-specific knowledge. Critical thinking in initial special education coursework “… provides discursive tools for making sense of disability and engaging in the critical conversations necessary to re-envision education for all” (Ashby, 2012, p. 98).

Developing students’ appreciation of the complexity of disability enables students to broaden their view as future teachers. Disability seen through a critical lens enables diversity, flexibility, and relationality to all become part of one’s complex identity. These complex identities impact the way we teach, learn, and communicate. In these introductory special education courses, undergraduate students were able to seed foundational groundwork to examine, embrace, and possibly even lead, inclusive changes in schools and communities through their critical engagement with topics related to disability.

References

Abu El-Haj, T. R. (2006). Elusive justice: Wrestling with difference and educational equity in everyday practice. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

 Ashby, C. (2012). Disability studies and inclusive teacher preparation: A socially just path for teacher education. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 37(2), 89-99. doi.org/10.1177/154079691203700204

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (1996). Critical thinking VALUE rubric. VALUE Rubrics website: www.aacu.org/value-rubrics

Bacon, J., & Blachman, S. (2017). A disability studies in education analysis of the edTPA through teacher candidate perspectives. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(4), 278-286. doi.org/10.1177/0888406417730110

Brune, J. A., & Wilson, D. J. (2013). Disability and passing: Blurring the lines of identity. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Practitioner inquiry: versions and variance (Ch. 2) in Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation (pp. 37-60). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Danforth, S. & Naraian, S. (2015). This new field of inclusive education: Beginning a dialogue on conceptual foundations. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 53(1), 70-85. doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-53.1.70

Etscheidt, S., Curran, C. M., & Sawyer, C. M. (2012). Promoting reflection in teacher preparation programs: A multilevel model. Teacher Education and Special Education, 35(1), 7-26. doi.org/10.1177/0888406411420887

Finley, A. P. (2011). How reliable are the VALUE rubrics? Peer Review, 13(4/1), 31.

Freedman, J., Applebaum, A., Woodfield, C., & Ashby, C. (2019). Integrating disability studies pedagogy in teacher education. Journal of Teaching Disability Studies, 1(1).

Huber, C. R., & Kuncel, N. R. (2016). Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 431-468. doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Tjosvold, D. (2014). Constructive controversy: The value of intellectual opposition. In P. T. Coleman, M. Deutsch, & E. C. Marcus (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (p. 76–103). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mariano, G. M. & Figliano, F. J. (2019). Handbook of research on critical thinking strategies in pre-service learning environments. IGI Global.

Mitra, S. (2006). The capability approach and disability. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 16(4), 236-247. doi.org/10.1177/10442073060160040501

Mutua, K., & Smith, R. M. (2006). How can disability studies in education be relevant to the practical concerns of teachers? In S. Danforth & S.L. Gabel (Eds.), Vital Questions Facing Disability Studies in Education (p. 121 – 133). Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.

Neuendorf, K. A. (2016). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Oliver, M. (1992). Changing the social relations of research production? Disability, Handicap & Society, 7(2), 101-114. doi.org/10.1080/02674649266780141

Oyler, C. (2011). Teacher preparation for inclusive and critical (special) education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 34(3), 201-218. doi.org/10.1177/0888406411406745

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006a). Critical thinking: The nature of critical and creative thought. Journal of Developmental Education, 30(2), 34.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006b). Critical thinking: Learn the tools the best thinkers use. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Pithers, R. T., & Soden, R. (2000). Critical thinking in education: A review. Educational Research, 42(3), 237-249. doi.org/10.1080/001318800440579

Pugach, M. C., & Seidl, B. L. (1998). Responsible linkages between diversity and disability: A challenge for special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 21(4), 319-333. doi.org/10.1177/088840649802100407

Sharp, L. A., & Goode, F. (2019). What challenges do special education teacher educators encounter while preparing novice special education teachers? Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 26 – 37.

Sensoy, O., & DiAngelo, R. (2017). Is everyone really equal?: An introduction to key concepts in social justice education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (1997). Defending the social model. Disability & Society, 12(2), 293-300. doi.org/10.1080/09687599727380

Wilson S. (2003). A relational model of disability. In S. Wilson (Eds.), Disability, counselling and psychotherapy: Challenges and opportunities (p. 19- 40). London, UK: Palgrave.

Yang, Y. T. C. (2012). Cultivating critical thinkers: Exploring transfer of learning from pre-service teacher training to classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1116-1130. doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.06.007

Zascavage, V., Masten, W. G., Schroeder-Steward, J., & Nichols, C. (2007). Comparison of Critical Thinking in Undergraduates and Graduates in Special Education. International Journal of Special Education, 22(1), 25-31. doi.org/0827-3383

Figure. Two exemplar pages of children’s books created by students.

Table.

Critical Thinking Assessment Data(Fall semesters 2019, 2018, 2017)

To top

Book Review: Exploring Citizenship Leadership

By Fany Ferrufino

Biography

Sue Barraclough wrote the book “Leadership (Exploring Citizenship). The book contains 32 pages. It costs $8.29. Publisher: Heinemann; revised ed. Edition (November 1, 2016). She is the author of books for children. She is Senior System Analyst at Yorkshire Building Society Group. She is from Bradford, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom.

Introduction

What makes a good leader? Why is honesty important? How do leaders communicate well? Read “Leadership” to learn about why people need leaders. Find out how leaders are chosen, what makes a good role model, and why everyone should try to be a leader sometimes.

Sue Barraclough is a senior system analyst at West Yorkshire, United Kingdom that wrote this book to provide precise definitions about leader, citizen, leadership, honesty for children.

Purpose of Thesis

Sue Barraclough wrote this book to explain definitions related to leadership for children to understand. She wants readers to have awareness of how important is to make good leaders with honesty and good communication skills to be a role model. She believes people need good leaders. Also, she thinks everyone should be a good leader.

Summary

This is a non-fiction book. In this book, the author defines the following concepts: citizenship, leader, leadership, honesty, fairness, good communication, respect, role model, speaking out. She also provides some tips to have good communication, to help a group do well, and to be a good leader. She asks some questions to encourage and motivate the reader to be a good leader. This book contains some photographs that reflect good leadership. These photographs are accompanied by captions.

Trace the Arguments: Weak and Strong Points

The author argues about how important is to have good leaders. She has strong points from the book that agree with. She believes that good leaders are everywhere: at home, in the school, in the city, in the country etc. she encourages reader to become leaders and to understand how hard is sometimes to be a leader. However, she thinks that leaders have a tremendous job to guide people and take good decisions for the benefit of the group. The author argues about the necessity of having good leaders to help everybody choose what to do or where to go. In this book, the author gives advice to respect our leaders that can be parents, teachers, and presidents. She argues and supports her thesis of believing in good leaders with values such as honesty and fairness. In my opinion, I believe that the author thesis is very positive and I have observed many strong points such as values and good attitudes a leader should have. I think that principals and administrators in schools should adopt these and more values nowadays to lead in the right way. I didn’t find any weak points in this book.

Compare and Contrast

In comparison with Michael Fullan in the book “Leading in a Culture of Change”, he mentioned some characteristics of good leadership similar to the book “Exploring Citizenship Leadership” by Sue Barraclough. However, Michael Fullan explains more complex contexts such as cultural of change, knowledge building, coherence making etc. In the contrary, Sue Barraclough explains easy definitions such as leadership, honesty, respect etc. Learning to lead is an important part of growing up (Sue Barraclough page 31). The content of this book was very good and easy to understand. Moreover, leaders who combine a commitment to moral purpose with a healthy respect for the complexities of the change process not only will be more successful but also will unearth deeper moral purpose (Michael Fullan page 5)

Key Quotes/Sayings from the Author

I didn’t find any quote on this book, but I found some sayings by Sue Barraclough in some sources: “The road is safety when we are careful”, “I know someone with dyslexia, so let’s understand health issues”, “When recycling, we make the difference”, “A soft, wool sweater will make you feel warm on cold mornings”, “Be a little angel”.

I found a quote from Leading in a Culture of Change from Michael Fullan: “Gaius Petronius nailed this problem almost two thousand year ago: We trained hard…but it seemed every time we were beginning to form up into teams we were reorganized. It was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any situation by reorganizing, and what a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization.”

References

Barraclough, S. (2016). Leadership-Exploring Citizenship. West Yorkshire, United Kingdom: Heinemann.

Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

To top

Book Review: Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff

By Elizabeth A. Moore

Burgess, Shelley and Houf, Beth. Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff. San Diego, California: Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc., 2017. 210pp. $17.99. 

        
A great leader creates a school “where students and staff are knocking down the doors to get in rather than out” (p. xviii). In the book Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff, educational leaders Shelly Burgess and Beth Houf help readers navigate the waters of leadership to transform their schools into irresistible places.

Burgess began her educational leadership journey as an enthusiastic and creative teacher and rose to higher leadership positions at the school and district level. Her husband, Dave Burgess, is well-known for writing the popular book among teachers, Teach like a Pirate. Both Shelly and Dave Burgess currently work full time as partners in their publishing and educational learning network, Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc., motivating others to teach and/or lead like pirates. Beth Houf also began her career as a teacher, moving into a leadership position as a principal. Houf experienced a period of burn-out as a principal and was considering leaving the profession when she attended a “Teach Like a Pirate” conference. Completely inspired by the ideas, her passion towards education was reignited. She decided that although Teach Like a Pirate was amazing, it was ultimately designed for teachers, not administrators. From there, Houf and Burgess teamed up to write a book that taught educational leaders how to lead like a PIRATE and make school amazing for students, staff, parents, and communities. Together, they explain how an education leader can transform their school culture by leading like a PIRATE and empowering staff.

Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff is divided into four sections. In the first section, Houf and Burgess explore a major theme of the book, the characteristics of a PIRATE leader. PIRATE leaders “inspire and influence other to follow them, even in the face of great risks. They lead their crew on a journey to seek great riches and rewards” (p. xvii). One must be passionate about and immerse themselves in their work. They must build rapport with others, ask good questions, and analyze what’s going on in order to create a trusting environment. They also must have the courage and desire for transformation, as well as daily enthusiasm. “As the leader, you are the emotional guide for others in your school” (p. 70). Displays of passion, courage, and enthusiasm will rub off on staff and students to help create positive learning community.

In the second section, Houf and Burgess explain how PIRATE leaders can find treasure (success) by staying true to their moral purpose while working towards their mission. Houf and Burgess stress the importance of ensuring all staff are understanding and supportive of how proposed changes align with the school’s mission, because if there is no commitment to the cause, there will be limited success. “If you want to set sail with your crew and chart a new course for your school or district, then everyone needs to have the same map and a compass that points them in the same direction—otherwise your ship will simply sink” (p. 76). Another theme in this section is that a great leader can bring out the magic in their staff to guide them towards success. Although leaders cannot always choose the staff they work with, they still have the ability to empower and motivate them towards transformation. Instead of getting upset with the current staff, Houf and Burgess suggest that a PIRATE leader asks themselves: “How can I lead my school to greatness using the team I have” (p. 83)? They encourage leaders to “be relentless in seeking out and nurturing each person’s greatness” (p. 83).

Furthermore, the second section also discusses the value of a leader’s time. Houf and Burgess believe that “if something is truly a priority, you have to make time for it (p. 104). They propose ways for leaders to reorganize their time so they can spend it on what matters most. One way of doing is this by activating both staff and student teams to complete tasks.

The third section of the book elaborates on empowering and building relationships with staff by having ANCHOR conversations: appreciation, notice the impact, collaborative conversations or captain-directed conversations, honor voice and choice, offer support, and reflection. Houf and Burgess focus on the power of words, and stress that “changing culture requires changing the conversations” (p. 143). Using one or all of these ANCHOR components in a conversation with staff ensures that they feel valued, learn something of value, and feel inspired to put newly learned knowledge to practice. A leader’s job is to bring staff up, not push them down.

In the last section, Houf and Burgess remind leaders that it is important to devote time to themselves. The book concludes with a call to action, emphasizing the obligation educational leaders have to actively support their teachers so that each student gets the amazing learning experiences they deserve. “There are no excuses when striving to meet goals, no matter the roadblocks (p. 203). Progress takes time, but it is certainly possible.

Critical Evaluation

Houf and Burgess include personal anecdotes throughout the book of their experiences as teachers and principals. While it is evident that both of these ladies are true PIRATE leaders, their passion and enthusiasm seem to be unrealistic at times. For example, in an effort to increase parent participation at parent-teacher conference night, Houf made a promise that if the school had 90% of parent attendance, she would spend the night in the trophy case in the school hallway. This was incredibly motivating to students, so the school did meet their goal and Houf admits that “Yes, I spent the night in the trophy case” (p. 58). Not all leaders are able to make promises as extravagant as this and this level of commitment can seem intimidating to leaders who have responsibilities outside of their career. In an attempt to demonstrate how a little absurdity can make a large impact, Houf may have unconsciously made leaders reading the book question their greatness, simply because they could never spend a night in a trophy case.

However, Houf and Burgess do keep their opinions realistic because they admit that being a leader is not always rainbows and sunshine. They include a list of things they dislike about their careers then explain that “while we all have things about our work that we don’t love to do, what we are passionate about is handling these things in the most effective and efficient way possible” (p. 8). By admitting that they do not love every aspect of their job, Houf and Burgess humanize themselves to the reader, making their suggestions in the book less intimidating.

In addition, PIRATE leaders Houf and Burgess make it known that they value the magic in their people over an educational program. While it is true that “programs don’t teach kids; teachers do” (p. 94), an evidence-based intervention program can lead to tremendous results. Burgess recounted that during her first year as principal, she threw out pieces of programs that she did not find valuable (p. 96). By doing so, she made those programs impossible to implement with fidelity. Her advice in this section is not sound, and many programs must be complete with all of the pieces so that they can be effectively implemented with fidelity. An alternative could be to have a professional development opportunity for staff so that they can build their understanding of the program and their confidence of implementing the program with fidelity. Burgess shared that when she observed one teacher in the classroom implementing a reading program, the teacher was confused and said to her students, “I’m sorry, I don’t know what it means; but we still have to try to do something” (p. 95). This clearly shows that the staff were not educated on the program and therefore making success impossible.

One of the strongest points in the book is the importance of having ANCHOR conversations to build relationships with staff and coach them to be better (there is always room for improvement). As previously mentioned, ANCHOR conversations are productive and empowering for both the leader and the staff member. Houf and Burgess primarily discuss having ANCHOR conversations after a couple minutes of observation in the classroom. Among other things, these conversations can help staff make connections between their actions and their students’ learning and notice the impact of their actions. “Making [a teacher] cognizant of their choices and then pointing out how those decisions made a positive impact helps ensure that good practices happen as the result of deliberate planning rather than by chance” (p. 156). ANCHOR conversations are not evaluative or judgmental. By teaching readers how to have ANCHOR conversations, Houf and Burgess have empowered them to immediately start coaching their staff.

Comparison to Fullan

Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff by Houf and Burgess aligns with many of the ideas presented in Leading in a Culture of Change by Fullan. Fullan believes that there are five components of leadership that create a commitment from staff and result in positive changes: moral purpose, understanding change, relationship building, knowledge creation and sharing, and coherence making. The first component, moral purpose, is evident in Houf and Burgess’ book as they consistently remind the reader that leaders have the responsibility to do what is best for their staff and students and that they have the power to make a real difference. They discuss using your moral purpose to create a long-term vision (p. 76). Fullan agrees that “leadership, if it is to be effective, has to have an explicit ‘making-a-difference’ sense of purpose” (p. 20).

Another component of a great leader, according to Fullan, is relationship building. This is a recurring theme throughout Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff. Houf and Burgess discuss the importance of having events such as staff retreats and socials to build relationships and learn more about each other’s lives, passions, and interests (p. 38). Fullan believes that good leaders have high emotional intelligence, with correlates with the character traits that Houf and Burgess describe of a PIRATE leader.

The remaining components of a great leader are also referenced throughout Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff. Obviously, there are a plethora of similarities between Fullan’s and Houf and Burgess’ books. However, there some differences among them. Fullan stresses the importance of leaders, especially principals, learning in context. Some specific in-context learning practices include monthly principal support groups and principal peer coaching (p.127). Throughout Houf and Burgess’ book, there is little mention of collaborating with other principals to increase a leader’s knowledge. Rather, most of the focus of the book was on how a leader could improve his/her staff.

For a more informative understanding of leadership, Fullan’s book is an appropriate choice, as it explicitly explains several theories. The audience for Fullan’s book includes both businessmen and educators. For a more inspirational read specifically about educational leadership, Houf and Burgess’ book is a good selection.

Conclusion

Overall, Lead Like a PIRATE: Make School Amazing for Your Students and Staff is a valuable guide for both experienced and new educational leaders. It truly does reignite the passion inside of the reader because it is filled with many practical ideas that can be put to practice immediately. Throughout the book, Houf and Burgess pose self-reflective questions and present real-life challenges to complete as practice for each newly learned skill. They incorporate technology by including links to websites and resources they have made, to serve as a guide and as an inspiration to readers. The authors’ writing flowed smoothly and accounted for an easy and inspirational read. Any educational leader should have this book on their shelf.

References

Burgess, S., & Houf, B. (2017). Lead like a PIRATE: Make school amazing for your students and staff. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc.

Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc. (2018). Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc. Retrieved from www.daveburgessconsulting.com

Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

To top

Latest Employment Opportunities Posted on NASET 

* Special Education (Autism) PreK-4  – General responsibilities indlude aiding each student consistent with his or her abilities and educational needs. Develop competence in the basic learning skills, progress on the basis of achievement, and to qualify for further education and/or employment. To learn more – Click here

* Virtual Special Education Teacher Positions – K12 believes in education for everyone. We provide families an online option for a high-quality, personalized education experience. Students can thrive, find their passion, and learn in an environment that encourages discovery at their own pace. In support of this, we are committed to creating and maintaining a culture of inclusion and diversity. To learn more – Click here

* Special Education Teacher – $60,000/school year (185 days), summers off with year-round pay and year round appreciation. Special Education Teachers needed in Arizona (Phoenix and surrounding cities). Needs are in the self-contained and resource settings serving students with emotional disabilities (ED), Autism (A), Severe/Profound (S/P), and Intellectual Disabilities (ID). STARS is the largest school contract agency in AZ. STARS is owned and operated by Occupational Therapists. You will be an employee and receive full benefits – To learn more – Click here

* (Remote) Special Education Teacher – Special Education Teacher provide instruction, support and guidance, manage the learning process, and focus on students’ individual needs as defined by each student’s IEP.  The special education teacher is also responsible for the compliance documents required in serving students with special needs. To learn more – Click here

* Early Childhood Specialist – Willamette Education Service District is accepting applications for multiple full-time (1.0 FTE) EI/ECSE Specialist positions with the Special Education Department’s Early Intervention/Early Childhood Special Education (EI/ECSE) program. The positions are for the 2020-2021 school year and may be based in Marion, Polk and/or Yamhill County.  Successful candidates will will follow a 190-day calendar and will begin on August 21, 2020. To learn more – Click here

* Executive Director of Special Education – Garland ISD seeks an Executive Director of Special Education with the following qualifications, Master’s Degree, Special Education Certification, Principal/Mid-Management Certification, three (3) years’ teaching experience; special education preferred, experience in successful leadership role at the District or State level, earned or in progress doctorate. To learn more – Click here

To top

Acknowledgements

Portions of this or previous month’s NASET’s Special Educator e-Journal were excerpted from:

• Center for Parent Information and Resources
• Committee on Education and the Workforce
• FirstGov.gov-The Official U.S. Government Web Portal
• Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals (JAASEP)
• National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth
• National Institute of Health
• National Organization on Disability
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
• U.S. Department of Education
• U.S. Department of Education-The Achiever
• U.S. Department of Education-The Education Innovator
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
• U.S. Department of Labor
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration
• U.S. Office of Special Education

The National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET) thanks all of the above for the information provided for this or prior editions of the Special Educator e-Journal

To top

To View or Download a PDF file for this issue of the Special Educator e-Journal  –  CLICK HERE

To top