Given the rapid growth of diversity in schools across the country, teacher educators are turning to innovative ways to redesign their programs. In this article, we describe efforts of a dual licensure program in which undergraduate teachers-in-training acquired knowledge and skills in core content, as well as evidence-based pedagogy and discipline specific proficiencies in both special education and elementary education. A primary goal was to ensure that graduates entered teaching with the tools to effectively respond to diverse learners within urban and rural school districts. Systematic alignment of program foundations across coursework, clinical experiences, and evaluation was intentional. School partners provided insights into the extent to which graduates possessed the knowledge and skills necessary for teaching in inclusive settings. Outcome data suggest that graduates ‘perform’ similarly to discipline-specific peers and bring strong collaborative skills in efforts to meet the needs of students in disabilities in all classrooms.
AlterJ., & CoggshallJ. G. (2009). Teaching as a clinical practice profession: Implications for teacher preparation and state policy. New York, NY: New York Comprehensive Center and the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
2.
BillingsleyB. S., GriffinC. C., SmithS. J., KammanM., & IsraelM. (2009). A review of teacher induction in special education: Research, practice & technology solutions (NCIPP Doc. No. RS-1). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, National Center to Inform Policy and Practice in Special Education Professional Development. Retrieved from http://ncipp.education.ufl.edu/files_5/NCIPP%20Induction%20Exc%20Summ.pdf
3.
BlantonL. P., & PugachM. C. (2007, June). Collaborative programs in general and special teacher education: An action guide for higher education and state policy makers. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
4.
BlantonL. P., & PugachM. C. (2011). Using a classification system to probe the meaning of dual licensure in general and special education.Teacher Education and Special Education, 34, 219–234.
5.
BlantonL. P., PugachM. C., & BovedaM. (2014). Teacher education reform initiatives and special education: Convergence, divergence, and missed opportunities (Document No. LS-3). Retrieved from http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/literaturesyntheses/
6.
BondyE., & RossD. D. (2005). Preparing for inclusive teaching: Meeting the challenges of teacher education reform. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
7.
ChildreA. L. (2014). Preparing special educators highly qualified in content: Alternative route certification for unlicensed teachers in rural Georgia.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 30, 23–31.
8.
CookL. H., & BoeE. E. (2007). National trends in the sources of supply of teachers in special and general education.Teacher Education and Special Education, 30, 217–232.
9.
FisherD., FreyN., & ThousandJ. (2003). What do special educators need to know and be prepared to do for inclusive schooling to work?Teacher Education and Special Education, 26, 42–50.
10.
FordA., PugachM. C., & Otis-WilbornA. (2001). Preparing general educators to work well with students who have disabilities: What's reasonable at the preservice level?Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 275–285.
11.
FullertonA., RubenB. J., McBrideS., & BertS. (2011). Evaluation of a merged secondary and special education program.Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(2), 45–60.
12.
GoldrickL., SindelarP., ZabalaD., & HirschE. (2014). The role of state policy in preparing educators to meet the learning needs of students with disabilities (Document No. PA-1). Gainesville, FL: Collaboration for Effective Educator, Development, Accountability, and Reform Center. Retrieved from http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/literature-syntheses/
13.
HardmanM. L. (2009). Redesigning the preparation of all teachers within the framework of an integrated program model.Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 25, 583–587.
Mason-WilliamsL. (2015). Unequal opportunities: A profile of the distribution of special education teachers.Exceptional Children, 81, 247–262.
16.
MastropieriM. A., ScruggsT. E., GraetzJ., NorlandJ., GardiziW., & McDuffieK., (2005). Case studies in teaching in content areas: Success, failures, and challenges.Intervention in School & Clinic, 40, 260–270.
17.
McLeskeyJ., & BillingsleyB. S. (2008). How does the quality and stability of the teaching force influence the research to practice gap? A perspective on the teacher shortage in special education.Remedial and Special Education Quarterly, 29, 293–305.
18.
McLeskeyJ., WaldronN. L., SpoonerF., & AlgozzineB. (2014). Handbook of effective, inclusive schools: Research and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
19.
MillerP. S., & StaytonV. (1996). Personnel preparation in early education and intervention: Recommended preservice and inservice practices. In OdomS. L. & McLeanM. E. (Eds.), Early intervention/early childhood special education: Recommended practices (pp. 329–358). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
20.
Office of Institutional Research. (2014). Institute of Higher Education Performance Report 2012-2013. Retrieved from University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Office of Educational Assessment, College of Education website http://edassessment.uncc.edu/home/institute-higher-education-reports
21.
StaytonV. D., & McCollumJ., (2002). Unifying general and special education: What does the research tell us?Teacher Education and Special Education, 25, 211–218.
22.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services, Office of Special Education Programs, 30th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individual with Disabilities Education Act, 2008, Washington, D.C., 2011. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2008/parts-b-c/30th-idea-arc.pdf
23.
YoungK. S. (2011). Combined credential programs: Pedagogic, practical, and ideological concerns.Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(2), 7–26.
