Making Caseloads Manageable: A Mixed Methods Study of Special Education Resource Teachers

Managing a caseload of students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) is a demanding working condition for special education teachers (SETs). Large and unmanageable caseloads are important because of the connections to the instability of the SET workforce, including the longstanding SET shortage. Researchers have recommended hiring more SETs to reduce caseload sizes, yet the SET shortage makes this recommendation difficult. The purpose of this mixed methods explanatory design study was to examine the lived experiences of SETs who have large caseloads and perceive their workloads to be manageable. In the quantitative phase of the study, 119 Oregon resource SETs completed a survey with workload manageability items and demographics items, including questions about caseloads. Through a two-way ANOVA analysis, the results indicated that while there was no significant difference in perceived workload manageability among SETs with small or large caseloads, there was a significant difference among those with one to six or seven or more disabilities on their caseloads. In the qualitative phase, seven participants from the quantitative phase with larger caseloads than the mean and higher perceived workload manageability than the mean were interviewed. The interviews highlighted the themes of organization and support structures with the sub-themes of strategies, scheduling, administrative support, collegial support, and support staff. The quantitative results have implications for the field about the manageability of caseloads, and the qualitative results provide suggestions for school districts on low or no-cost methods to support SETs in managing their caseloads

Collaborative mentoring to prepare doctoral students for college teaching

[EN] This project used psychosocial mentoring (Curtin et al., 2016) to create a collaborative mentoring experience prepare doctoral students to become the instructors of record. In the collaborative mentoring experience, we paired doctoral students with a faculty member teaching a class that the doctoral student aspired to teach. The doctoral student observed the faculty member teaching, engaged in discussions with the faculty member, and reflected on the process. The following semester, the doctoral student became the instructor of record for the course. Following this experience, two doctoral students and one faculty member completed a retrospective self-study through journaling and discussions. After analyzing the results through discussions, we identified three themes: (1) understanding the course and our learners, (2) underlying goals and processes involved in college teaching, and (3) stretching the scope of practice for instructors of record. This paper describes the theme of stretching the scope of practice for instructors of record. Implications for teaching and learning in higher education are discussed.Hogue, L.; Bleak, K.; Abernathy, T. (2021). Collaborative mentoring to prepare doctoral students for college teaching. En 7th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd'21). Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València. 1333-1340. https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd21.2021.13145OCS1333134

Co-Rumination and Co–Problem Solving in the Daily Lives of Adolescents With Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE: The study examines differences in the prevalence and nature of co-rumination during real-world social interactions with peers and parents among adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD) compared to healthy controls. METHOD: Sixty youth (29 with current MDD and 31 no-psychopathology controls) completed a self-report measure of co-rumination and a three-week ecological momentary assessment (EMA) protocol that measured the nature of face-to-face social interactions with peers and parents following a negative event in the adolescents’ daily lives. Specifically, EMA was used to assess rates of problem talk, including both co-rumination and co-problem-solving. Group differences in self-report and EMA measures were examined. RESULTS: Adolescents with MDD reported co-ruminating more often than adolescents with no Axis 1 disorders during daily interactions with both parents (Cohen’s d = .78) and peers (d = 1.14), and also reported more co-rumination via questionnaire (d = .58). Adolescents with MDD engaged in co-problem-solving with peers less often than healthy controls (d = .78), but no group differences were found for rates of co-problem-solving with parents. CONCLUSIONS: Results are consistent with previous research linking co-rumination and depression in adolescence and extend these self-report--based findings to assessment in an ecologically valid context. Importantly, results support that MDD youth tend to co-ruminate more and problem-solve less with peers in their daily lives compared to healthy youth, and that co-rumination also extends to parental relationships. Interventions focused on decreasing co-rumination with peers and parents and improving problem-solving skills with peers may be helpful for preventing and treating adolescent depression