The purpose of this survey study was to obtain descriptive information about job situations of special education paraeducators from paraeducators across one state and determine their perceptions regarding roles, current issues identified in the literature, and other issues of concern. Of particular interest was whether perceptions varied based on (a) paraeducator assignment (one-to-one or group) or (b) time in general education settings. More than 1,800 paraeducators responded. Findings supported previous studies based on smaller samples. Problematic issues previously associated with one-to-one paraeducators in general education settings were reported as concerns by both one-to-one and group paraeducators who spent all or most of their day in self-contained settings. Discussion centers on the importance of “paraeducator voice” in efforts to address broader issues of inclusive schooling, clarification of paraeducators as instructional team members, and better understandings situated in practice of the paraeducator role as an effective intervention alternative sometimes for students with individualized education programs.
BroerS. M.DoyleM. B.GiangrecoM. F. (2005). Perspectives of students with intellectual disabilities about their experiences with paraprofessional support. Exceptional Children, 71, 415–430.
2.
CarterE. W.O’RourkeL.SiscoL.PelsueD. (2009). Knowledge, responsibilities, and training needs of paraprofessionals in elementary and secondary schools. Remedial and Special Education, 30, 344–359. doi:10.1177/074193250832439910.1177/0741932508324399
3.
CarterE. W.SiscoL. G.BrownL.BrickhamD.Al-KhabbazZ. (2008). Peer interactions and academic engagement of youth with developmental disabilities in inclusive middle and high school classrooms. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 113, 479–494.
4.
Causton-TheoharisJ. N.MalmgrenK. W. (2005). Increasing peer interactions for students with severe disabilities via paraprofessional training. Exceptional Children, 71, 431–444.
5.
Cochran-SmithM.LytleS. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research in the next generation. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
6.
Darling-HammondL. (2009). Teacher education and the American future. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 35–47. doi:10.1177/002248710934802410.1177/0022487109348024
7.
Data Accountability Center. (2010). Health Sciences Center/Human Development Center, Louisiana State University. New Orleans, LA: Author. Retrieved from https://www.ideadata.org/
8.
DowningJ. E.RyndakD. L.ClarkD. (2000). Paraeducators in inclusive classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 171–181. doi:10.1177/07419325000210030810.1177/074193250002100308
9.
DoyleM. B. (2008). The paraprofessional’s guide to the inclusive classroom: Working as a team (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
10.
FrenchN. K. (2003a). Managing paraeducators in your school: How to hire, train, and supervise non-certified staff. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
11.
FrenchN. K. (2003b). Paraeducators in special education programs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 36, 1–16.
12.
GhereG.York-BarrJ. (2007). Paraprofessional turnover and retention in inclusive programs: Hidden costs and promising practices. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 21–32. doi:10.1177/0741932507028001030110.1177/07419325070280010301
13.
GiangrecoM. F.BroerS. M. (2005). Questionable utilization of paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes?Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 10–26. doi:10.1177/1088357605020001020110.1177/10883576050200010201
14.
GiangrecoM. F.BroerS. M.EdelmanS. W. (2001). Teacher engagement with student with disabilities: Differences based on paraprofessional service delivery models. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 75–86.
15.
GiangrecoM. F.DoyleM. B. (2007). Teacher assistants in inclusive schools. In FlorianL. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of special education (pp. 429–439). London, UK: Sage.
16.
GiangrecoM. F.EdelmanS. W.LuisielliT. E.MacFarlandS. Z. C. (1997). Helping or hovering? Effects of instructional assistant proximity on students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 64, 7–18.
17.
GiangrecoM. F.SuterJ. C.DoyleM. B. (2010). Paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: A review of recent research. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20, 41–57. doi:10.1080/1047441090353535610.1080/10474410903535356
18.
Hampden-ThompsonG.DiehlJ.KinukawaA. (2007). Description and employment criteria of instructional paraprofessionals (NCES 2007–2008). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
19.
HughesM. T.Valle-RiestraD. M. (2008). Responsibilities, preparedness and job satisfaction of paraprofessionals working with young children with disabilities. International Journal of Early Years Education, 16, 163–173. doi:10.1080/0966976070151689210.1080/09669760701516892
20.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (2008).
21.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004).
22.
LaneK. L.FletcherT.CarterE.DejudC.DelorenzoJ. (2007). Paraprofessional-led phonological awareness training with youngsters at-risk for reading and behavioral concerns. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 266–276. doi:10.1177/0741932507028005020110.1177/07419325070280050201
23.
LincolnY.GubaE. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
24.
MalmgrenK. W.Causton-TheoharisJ. N. (2006). Boy in the bubble: Effects of paraprofessional proximity on the interactions of a student with behavior disorders. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 20, 301–312.
25.
MinondoS.MeyerL.XinJ. F. (2001). The role and responsibilities of teaching assistants in inclusive education: What’s appropriate?Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 114–119.
26.
MurrellP. C. (2009). Toward social justice in urban education. In PetermanF. (Ed.), Partnering to prepare urban educators (pp. 41–57). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
27.
PickettA. L. (2007). Paraeducators: Their roles and responsibilities. In PickettA. L.GerlachK.MorganR.LikensM.WallaceT., Paraeducators in schools: Strengthening the education team (pp. 1–29). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
28.
PickettA. L.GerlachK. (2003). Supervising paraeducators in educational settings: A team approach. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
29.
PickettA. L.GerlachK.MorganR.LikensM.WallaceT. (2007). Paraeducators in schools: Strengthening the educational team. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
30.
PickettA. L.LikensM.WallaceT. (2003). The employment and preparation of paraeducators: State of the art—2003. New York, NY: National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals in Education and Related Services.
31.
RobertsonK.ChamberlainB.KasariC. (2003). General education teachers’ relationship with included students with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33, 123–130. doi:10.1023/A:102297910809610.1023/A:1022979108096
32.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
TilleryC. Y.WertsM. G.RoarkR.HarrisS. (2003). Perceptions of paraeducators on job retention. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26, 118–127. doi:10.1177/002246690731335310.1177/0022466907313353
34.
VadasyP. F.SandersE. A.PeytonJ. A. (2006). Paraeducator-supplemented instruction in structural analysis with text reading practice for second and third graders at risk for reading problems. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 365–378. doi:10.1177/0741932506027006060110.1177/07419325060270060601
35.
WertsM. G.ZigmondN.LeeperD. C. (2001). Paraprofessional proximity and academic engagement: Students with disabilities in primary-aged classrooms. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 424–440.
36.
WoleryM.WertsM. G.SnyderE. D.CaldwellN. K.AnthonyL.HeckathornJ. K.NorlanderJ. (1996). Results from nationwide survey of paraprofessionals, teachers, and principals. Pittsburgh: PA: Allegheny Singer Research Institute, Child & Family Studies.
