Search

The authors examined, by direct observation and 1 hr interval self-reporting, teacher time use in 4 types of special education programs (adaptive behavior units, content mastery, coteaching, resource room). Over 7,000 pieces of data were collected across an academic year from 31 teachers in 24 schools within 9 districts in the Southwestern United States. Interrater reliability was established with concurrent observers visiting classrooms. Differences between program types were reliably established, with some of those differences anticipated and others not. Across programs, an average special education teacher time use profile also was plotted, with interesting findings including only 20% of class time spent on academic instruction and nearly 17% spent on special and general education paperwork. The implications are described for teachers and administrators and for policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies on special education teacher time use (TTU) have indicated that special education teachers spend small percentages of their day teaching. The authors examined goal setting and self-monitoring to change the time use of 4 teachers. In terms of TTU, each teacher articulated goals for increasing some tasks (e.g., instruction) and decreasing others (e.g., paperwork). Data indicated that self-monitoring of time use produced medium and moderate effects for 1 teacher and small effects for another. Data for the 2 other teachers suggested that there are institutional barriers to increasing instructional time, even for highly motivated teachers. This unique and preliminary study on changing TTU articulated teacher beliefs regarding barriers to changing teacher time. In addition, this study mirrored R. Ingersoll's (1996, 2003) theoretical work, which indicated that teachers across the United States work every day in conditions shaped and controlled by a system that they do not control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the increasing influence of technology and the explosion in data collection demands, the acceptance and assimilation of new paradigms and technologies require today's educators, researchers, and evaluators to consider alternative tools, and apply them effectively. One of these alternatives, handheld computers, also known as personal digital assistants (PDAs), makes the benefits of computerized data collection more accessible to field-based researchers. An evaluation of handheld computers as data collection tools in research settings requires an understanding of their use from different perspectives in existing research. This review examines the willingness of teachers to adopt handheld data collection systems by focusing on 5 main features: (a) ease of use, (b) usefulness, (c) subjective norms, (d) intention to use, and (e) dependability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]