The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) defines a paraeducator as“a school employee who works under the direction of a certified staff member to support and assist in providing instructional programs and services to children with disabilities or eligible young children” (IDEA, 2008, Part B, Section 612 (a)15(B) iii). Paraeducators have several roles and responsibilities, but they are often not qualified to perform such duties (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012). This article reviews four pieces of literature to determine how teachers and schools can prepare paraeducators for success in the classroom. The perceptions that paraeducators have of themselves are reviewed, as well as how parents, teachers, and researchers perceive paraeducators. The limitations of the studies are reviewed and ideas for future research are suggested. This article concludes by explaining what teachers and schools need to do in order to ensure paraeducators are prepared to be successful.
Abstract
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) defines a paraeducator as“a school employee who works under the direction of a certified staff member to support and assist in providing instructional programs and services to children with disabilities or eligible young children” (IDEA, 2008, Part B, Section 612 (a)15(B) iii). Paraeducators have several roles and responsibilities, but they are often not qualified to perform such duties (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012). This article reviews four pieces of literature to determine how teachers and schools can prepare paraeducators for success in the classroom. The perceptions that paraeducators have of themselves are reviewed, as well as how parents, teachers, and researchers perceive paraeducators. The limitations of the studies are reviewed and ideas for future research are suggested. This article concludes by explaining what teachers and schools need to do in order to ensure paraeducators are prepared to be successful.
Paraeducators’ preparedness for success: A literature review
There are over 760,000 paraeducators working in K-12 schools in the United States (National Education Association, 2015). While paraeducators go by many names, such as paraprofessional, teacher assistant, or teacher aide, their responsibilities are essentially the same throughout the nation. That is, to provide support within the classroom. Paraeducators have consistently been described as the backbone of the classroom, whether that classroom is self-contained or inclusive. However, a percentage of these paraeducators are not qualified for their position, as data collected per Section 618 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) suggest. In the 2016-2017 school year, 18% of Florida’s employed paraeducators were not qualified for their position (U.S. Department of Education, 2017). While many paraeducators are qualified to work in the school setting, they feel unprepared to provide the behavioral support and instructional help that is expected (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012; Walker, 2017). Paraeducators work closely with students but if they are not educated, trained, and prepared to fulfill their duties, how successful can they really be?
In this literature review, four journal articles are analyzed to show paraeducators’ preparedness for success. Using the PsychINFO database, related articles were selected under the criteria that they were written a) within the past 15 years and b) in the United States. Each article was dissected and will be discussed in the following pages. These articles include: a) “What Parents Tell Us About Paraeducators” (Werts, Harris, Tillery, & Roark, 2004); b) “Roles, Responsibilities, and Concerns of Paraeducators: Findings from a Statewide Survey” (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012); c) “Assessing Paraprofessionals’ Perceived Educational Needs and Skill Level with Function-based Behavioral Intervention” (Walker, 2016); and d) “Special Education Teachers’ Supervision of Paraeducators: A Quantitative Study of Team Sharedness” (Panitz, 2012).
This review will first discuss the roles of a paraeducator and the qualifications/training needed to become a paraeducator. In addition, this article includes paraeducators’ own perceptions of themselves, parents’ perceptions, teachers’ perceptions, and researchers’ perceptions of paraeducators, as well as the limitations of the studies and suggestions for future research. It will conclude with a call to action that explains how teachers and schools can increase preparedness of paraeducators in order to promote success in the classroom.
Paraeducators
According toThe Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a paraeducator is“a school employee who works under the direction of a certified staff member to support and assist in providing instructional programs and services to children with disabilities or eligible young children” (IDEA, 2008, Part B, Section 612 (a)15(B) iii).
Roles and Responsibilities of a Paraeducator
When paraeducators first began working with teachers, their main responsibility was to perform clerical duties so the teacher could focus on providing instruction. Over the years, a paraeducator’s role has greatly increased to include several responsibilities (Panitz, 2012). In a qualitative study by Werts et al. (2004), parents of students with special needs who had a paraeducator in their inclusive classroom were interviewed. When asked why the paraeducator is in the classroom, 68% of parents answered that the paraeducator’s responsibility is to provide academic support. 25% of parents reported that that paraeducator is in the class to help keep the child focused on his/her work. 21% of parents believed the paraeducator is present to provide behavior support. The truth is that all of these responsibilities are typically fulfilled by the paraeducator.
In another study conducted by Fisher and Pleasants (2012), 1,867 paraeducators completed an anonymous survey and returned it to the researchers via U.S. mail. Some of these paraeducators spent their entire day in a self-contained classroom while others spent some or all of their time in an inclusive classroom. In one portion of the survey, participants were asked about twelve different paraeducator tasks that were pulled from literature. These tasks include: a) behavioral and social support, b) implementing teacher-planned instruction, c) supervising students, d) personal care support, e) attending planning meetings, f) adapting lessons designed by the general education teacher, g) providing information between general education teacher and the special education teacher, h) clerical duties, i) attending faculty meetings, j) providing information between school and parents, k) developing lesson plans, and l) interpreting for families. Participants were to indicate if a task was “a primary role, a secondary role, rarely their role, or never their role” (p. 290) and to indicate if they thought the task was appropriate for a paraeducator to do. The results of this survey showed that 53% of participants believed that behavioral and social support was their primary role, followed by implementing teacher-planned instruction (48%), supervising students (36%), and personal care support (36%). At least 60% of participants believed that ten of the twelve tasks were appropriate roles for paraeducators. The inappropriate roles identified were developing lesson plans and interpreting for families (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012).
Walker (2017) also suggests that one important role of a paraeducator is to assist with challenging student behaviors and further explains that paraeducators should help implement positive behavior intervention plans.
The state or district typically has paraeducator responsibilities and expectations listed in the job description. In Broward County, Florida, the “essential performance responsibilities” of a paraeducator (teacher assistant) primarily include assisting the classroom teacher with planning, designing, prepping, and implementing instructional activities. Assisting with behavior, personal hygiene, toileting, and feeding needs are also responsibilities of paraeducators who work with students with disabilities (The School Board of Broward County, 2015).
Qualifications and Training needed to Become a Paraeducator
The professional qualifications and training of paraeducators vary by state. Currently, most states require a paraeducator to either have at least two years (60 credits) of college coursework, an associate’s degree, or a high school degree paired with a passing score on the ParaPro assessment. Notice that the college coursework is not required to be education-related. In fact, about two-thirds of paraeducators have no relevant college coursework (Panitz, 2012).
Perceptions of Paraeducators
Paraeducators are expected to do several roles in a school. Perceptions of what paraeducators do, their effectiveness, and how they feel have been discovered through qualitative research studies (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012; Panitz, 2012; Walker, 2017; Werts et al., 2004).
Paraeducators’ Perceptions of Self
In Walker’s (2017) study, 487 special education paraeducators in Virginia participated in an online survey that assessed their behavior intervention knowledge. In one portion of the survey, the paraeducators indicated their skill level (none, low, moderate, high) for ten domains of function-based intervention. The domains with the highest ratings were (a) “developing hypothesis statements based on observational data”; (b) “conducting ongoing assessment of changes in behavior due to intervention”; (c) “defining challenging behavior such that it can be observed and quantified”; and (d) “developing hypothesis statements with interview data” (p. 168). However, 38% of participants reported they had little or no skill level in the four aforementioned domains. Overall, results indicated that paraeducators had a low or moderate skill levels for all ten domains (Walker, 2017).
Another component in Walker’s (2017) survey was for the participants to rate their need for training (none, low moderate, high) in the same ten domains. Results showed that the participants felt they needed a low to moderate amount of training for each domain. 56% of participants indicated a moderate to high need for training in developing intervention plans and 54% indicated a moderate to high need for training in selecting correct intervention strategies (p. 165).
In addition, Fisher and Pleasants’ (2012) study also had paraeducators indicate areas of concern. It showed that 70% of participants were concerned that they didn’t have the expertise needed for their job. Another concern by 73% of participants was paraeducator turnover, which can be attributed to the low pay and high expectations.
In a study conducted by Panitz (2012), teams made up of one special education teacher and one paraeducator, referred to as a “dyad” (p. 1), were surveyed from fifteen schools in Maryland. Questionnaire responses from paraeducators indicated that when compared to a teacher, paraeducators perceive a lower level of confidence in their dyad’s ability to meet student needs, based on five professional standards. These standards include the ability to “(a) design curriculum and instruction, (b) support diverse learners, (c) use assessment to guide learning and teaching, (d) create a productive classroom environment, and (e) develop professionally” (p. 81).
Parents’ Perceptions of Paraeducators
Werts, et al.’s (2004) study on parents of children with special needs who have a paraeducator in their classroom revealed that most parents have a positive attitude towards paraeducators. However, some parents feel that paraeducators require more training, especially when working with students with special needs. One parent stated “I don’t like to put down any of our ed. assistants. I just know they probably don’t have as much training as our teachers do” (p. 236). Nonetheless, several parents understand the benefit of having a paraeducator in the classroom and express a desire for there to be more.
Teachers’ Perceptions of Paraeducators
Fisher and Pleasants’ (2012) study indicated that 78% of paraeducators are concerned with how they are treated by others in the school. Participants reported that they feel they are shown “little respect” (p. 292) and that they are “required to do the teacher’s job” (p. 292). So, how does the teacher feel about his/her paraeducator(s), whom he/she is expected to work closely with? To answer this question, begin with the fact that several paraeducators enter their role unprepared, leaving the responsibility of training the paraeducator to fall on the classroom teacher. Furthermore, the classroom teacher is the direct supervisor of the paraeducator. Research indicates that many classroom teachers fail to demonstrate effective supervision procedures, as their college coursework does not discuss how to supervise another adult (Panitz, 2012).
In Panitz’s (2012) study, teachers were asked via survey to rate their perception of the frequency in which they practice supervisory behaviors with the other member of their dyad. This section of the survey consisted of seven questions (one question per supervisory behavior) which were pulled from each of the following skill areas: “(a) planning, (b) scheduling, (c) instructional support, (d) modeling, (e) public relations, (f) training, and (g) management” (p. 78). These are the seven skill areas necessary to effectively train and supervise a paraeducator. Results showed that on a frequency scale of 0 (never used) to 5 (very frequently used), special education teachers reported that they most often “provide clear, daily direction in coordinating plans, schedules, and tasks” (p. 204) for the paraeducator, “model a caring and respectful manner when interacting with students” (p. 205), “support the paraeducator in the use of modified instructional materials to accommodate the learning needs of the student” (p. 208) and “maintain regular positive and supportive interaction with the paraeducator” (p. 210). Less frequently, teachers believe they “provide opportunities for on the job training for paraeducator skill development” (p. 206), “clearly describe to the paraeducator his/her’s roles and responsibilities” (p. 207), and “advocate for the paraeducator” (p. 209). While teachers perceive they are performing these skills, are they performing them effectively?
Researchers Perceptions of Paraeducators
Research has shown that schools employ paraeducators who do not have the knowledge required to be successful (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012; Panitz, 2012; Walker, 2017). Fisher and Pleasants (2012) are curious to know why “the least qualified staff are teaching students with the most complex learning characteristics” (p. 288). Some paraeducators are hired with little experience in the field and are expected to be taught by their classroom teacher. The implication arises when the classroom teacher doesn’t have the knowledge, desire, or time to train the paraeducator. Schools offer little to no training or professional development to teach paraeducators what to do and how to do it correctly.
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
All four of the studies reviewed in this article are qualitative. The study by Werts, Harris, Tillery, and Roark’s (2004) offered insight of parents’ perception of paraeducators. However, the participants of the study were parents who had a child with special needs in an inclusive classroom with a paraeducator. This causes limitations, as several students with special needs work closely with a paraeducator in a self-contained classroom. To further understand parent perceptions, researchers should collect qualitative data from parents of students in a self-contained class with a paraeducator. Also, the instrument was an interview (mostly in-person but some were via telephone), which may have caused parents to withhold negative information, potentially causing the data collected to be biased. In future studies, researchers should collect data via an anonymous questionnaire.
The study by Fisher and Pleasants (2012) is limited in that it only assesses paraeducators’ perceptions of self within a single midwestern state. Because qualifications of becoming a paraeducator vary across states, the sample for the study should consist of paraeducators from multiple states in order to produce more accurate data. In addition, the sample offers limitations in that only paraeducators who elected to respond to the survey were participants. This may imply that the participants of this study have more initiative and/or drive than other paraeducators who decided not to participate, which biases the data.
In Walker’s (2017) study, which assessed paraeducator’s perceived needs for function-based behavior intervention, limitations also arise due to the fact that the sample size was taken from only one state (Virginia). Of the 487 participants in the sample, 87% self-identified as special education paraeducators and continued to complete the survey. However, 11% of the participants self-identified as special education paraeducators then did not respond to any survey items. This data indicates that those paraeducators who did follow through with completing the survey may possess characteristics that cause them to act similarly in their job. That is, they follow through with tasks and take time to complete things that may be beneficial. Therefore, the data collected may be inaccurate and cannot be generalized for all paraeducators.
The last study, conducted by Panitz (2017), focused on special education teachers’ supervision of paraeducators. While paraeducators are found across educational settings, this study’s sample size consisted only of teachers and paraeducators from nonpublic special education school settings. It is possible that private schools have different qualifications for paraeducators to be hired, thus affecting the ability to generalize the findings from this study. This study, too, is limited to one state (Maryland).
Conclusion
Overall, paraeducators feel unprepared for their job. How can schools ensure that their paraeducators are prepared for success? As previously discussed, teachers do not study how to supervise a paraeducator in their teacher preparation programs. Teachers attempt different strategies to create a collaborative environment, but little are research-based. As Panitz (2012) suggests, teachers should be taught to supervise other adults before they begin their teaching career. Research-based strategies for effectively supervising a paraeducator should be embedded throughout college coursework to prepare teachers for success. After all, teachers typically have the responsibility of giving on-the-job training to their staff. In addition, in order to prepare paraeducators for success in the classroom, which leads to positive student achievement, schools and/or districts should be prepared to spend resources on training paraeducators. Paraeducators need time to learn their roles and responsibilities, expand their knowledge of students with special needs, and collaborate with their assigned teacher. Only then will the classroom flourish.
References
Fisher, M., Pleasants, S. L., (2012) Roles, responsibilities, and concerns of paraeducators: Findings from a statewide survey. Remedial and Special Education, 33(5), 287–297. doi.org/10.1177/0741932510397762
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (2008).
National Education Association. (2015). The 2015 ESP data book [Data file]. Retrieved from supported.nea.org/resource/2015-esp-data-book/
National Education Association. (2019). Who are paraeducators? Retrieved from www.nea.org/home/67057.htm
Panitz, B. L. (2012). Special education teachers’ supervision of paraeducators: A quantitative study of team sharedness (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (Accession No. 3528621).
The School Board of Broward County. (2015) Job description of a teacher assistant [Scanned document]. Retrieved from www.applitrack.com/broward/onlineapp/1BrowseFile.aspx
U.S. Department of Education. (2017). IDEA section 618 data files: Personnel [Data file]. Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/programs/osepidea/618-data/state-level-data-files/index.html
Walker, V. L. (2017) Assessing paraprofessionals’ perceived educational needs and skill level with function-based behavioral intervention. Exceptionality, 25(3), 157-169. doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2016.1196443
Werts, M. G., Harris, S., Tillery, C. Y., & Roark, R. (2004). What parents tell us about paraeducators. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 232-239. dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1177/07419325040250040601
