Tools for You: Selected Article Summaries

For a comprehensive and up to date review of literature related to working with paraeducators, see Michael Giangreco’s site at http://www.uvm.edu/~cdci/?Page=parasupport/chrono.html


Broer, S. M., Doyle, M. B., & Giangreco, M. F. (2005). Perspectives of students with intellectual disabilities about their experiences with paraprofessional support. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 415-430.
This study addressed experiences and perspectives of students who received paraprofessional supports while in general education classrooms. Sixteen young adults with intellectual disabilities were interviewed about their experiences in school, their perspectives about the supports they received, and advice they would offer to school personnel. The findings presented participants’ positive, negative, and sometimes ambivalent perspectives about paraprofessionals as mother, friend, protector, and primary teacher. These perspectives revealed the primacy, and sometimes exclusivity, of relationships between the former students and the paraprofessionals assigned to support them. This study provided insight into the relationships between students with disabilities and paraprofessionals and how those relationships affected the students’ self-perceptions, as well as their interactions with their teachers and classmates without disabilities.

Causton-Theoharis, J. N., & Malmgren, K. W. (2005). Increasing peer interactions for students with severe disabilities via paraprofessional training. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 431-444.
This study investigated the effectiveness of a training program aimed at teaching four paraprofessionals to facilitate interactions between students with severe disabilities and their peers. Previous research has shown that without proper training, paraprofessionals can act in ways that inadvertently isolate and segregate the students whom they support. These findings confirmed that paraprofessionals can learn to facilitate new interactions between students with and without disabilities after participating in a 4-hout inservice training. This study demonstrated that a relatively short and low-cost paraprofessional training program could provide an immediate and potentially long-lasting positive impact on the interaction rates of students with severe disabilities in inclusive classrooms.

Chopra, R. V., & French, N. K. (2004). Paraeducator relationships with parents of students with significant disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 240-251.
This study explored the relationships that existed between parents and paraeducators in the context of children with significant disabilities. In-depth interviews were conducted with 17 participants, which included parents, paraeducators, and teachers of students with significant support needs. The findings revealed five different types of relationships: close and personal friendship, routine limited interactions, routine extended interactions, minimal relationship, and tense relationship. The study confirmed that paraeducators and parents communicate on a daily basis, sometimes extensively, and sometimes sharing close relationships. It also confirmed that parents and paraeducators believed that close relationships were beneficial to the child. Finally, the study revealed that for paraeducator-parent relationships to be beneficial, they must remain within the limits and boundaries established by the teacher.

Chopra, R. V., Sandoval-Lucero, E., Aragon, L., Bernal, C., Berg De Balderas, H., & Carroll, D. (2004). The paraprofessional role of connector. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 219-231.
The goal of this research was to determine if paraprofessionals felt they served as connectors to the community and what factors were associated with their performance of that role. Forty-nine paraeducators employed in various educational settings participated in focus-group interviews. They discussed perceptions of the role they play in connecting the school to its community. Paraeducators saw themselves as community representatives, having close relationships with students and families, and providing cultural and linguistic continuity for students. The paraeducators also shared how they provided connections between the student and curriculum by using specific strategies aimed at helping students learn. Finally, the study uncovered the conditions within a school culture that often inhibit the paraprofessional’s ability to act as a connector.

Gessler Werts, M., Harris, S., Young Tillery C., & Roark, R. (2004). What parents tell us about paraeducators. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 232-239.
This study examined parent perceptions of the paraeducator’s role. Thirty-three paraeducator/student dyads working in inclusive classrooms were observed and interviewed. Twenty-eight parents of the 33 students observed were interviewed about their child’s paraeducator. Results indicated that parents reported positive perceptions of the paraeducators working and interacting with their children. Overall, parents perceived paraeducators as an important part of their children’s education. In addition, parents offered recommendations for improving the use of paraeducators, including the need for more training and better communication between parents and school personnel.

Giangreco, M.F., Yuan, S., McKenzie, B., Cameron, P., Fialka, J. (2005). “Be Careful What You Wish For…”: Five Reasons to Be Concerned About the Assignment of Individual Paraprofessionals, Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(5), 28-34.
This article addresses a growing concern about the assignment of individual paraeducators to students with disabilities and details research-based reasons for concern:

• Individual paraprofessional supports are linked with low levels of teacher involvement as teachers become reliant on paraeducators.
  
• Individual paraprofessional supports are linked with inadvertent detrimental effects such as unnecessary dependence and interference with peer interaction.
  
• Individual paraprofessionals are often inadequately trained, unsupervised, and lacking the direction of qualified special educators yet they are expected to teach the students with the most complex learning characteristics.
  
• Providing individual paraprofessionals who act as primary teachers and make day to day curricular decisions for students with special needs relieves pressures on teachers, special educators, and administrators to effect needed change in the schools. Is this (mis)use of paraeducators disguising problems in education? 
  
• An over reliance on paraeducators has led to an increased need for educators to explore different supports that strengthen collaboration, build capacity in general education, and place more reliance on natural supports.  
  
• General Suggestions to Address Concerns:  Begin with improved communication - from informal conversation and collaboration to implementation of school-wide task forces.  Scrutinize and individualize current roles and practices.  Provide education and training opportunities.  Seek out familial collaboration.  Involve students in the decision making process concerning their supports. 
• Consider peer supports, resource reallocation, and building capacity as alternatives to individual paraeducator supports.  Giangreco indicates that the key to success is finding an individualized balance between individual paraeducator supports and emerging alternatives.

Mueller, P.H., (2002). The Paraeducator Paradox, Exceptional Parent Magazine, 32(9), 64-67.
In this article, Mueller explores what she refers to as the paradox of untrained, underpaid, and devalued staff members providing instruction to the most challenging students.  Paraeducators often suffer from inadequate orientation and professional development, role confusion, poor supervision, lack of support, inadequate performance evaluations, lack of respect as members of the educational community, and general overuse.  In response to these issues, Mueller details how to implement several specific strategies for improvement: parental involvement in the hiring process, providing comprehensive job descriptions, providing relevant orientation and professional development, providing adequate supervision and support, developing appropriate evaluation systems, developing a process for determining the level of support needed, reviewing staff assignments, and valuing paraeducators. 

Trautman, M. L. (2004). Preparing and managing paraprofessionals. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39(3), 131-138.
This article summarizes current legislation regarding the roles and responsibilities of paraeducators. Methods and ideas are suggested for preparing and managing paraeducators.

White, R. (2004). The recruitment of paraeducators into the special education profession. A review of progress, select evaluation outcomes, and new initiatives. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 214-218.
The article provides a review of the arguments for and the history of recruitment of paraeducators into teacher education and special education. Findings provide evidence for supporting paraeducator-to-teacher programs that are properly conceived and funded because they can add to a diverse, resilient, and quality teacher workforce.