special education in rural settings

Ethics in Special Education in Rural Settings

Running head: ETHICS IN SPECIAL EDUCATION IN RURAL SETTINGS


Philosophical Perspectives in Special Education

April 2010

Janet Vanheck

1


There are a number of issues to consider when examining ethical considerations

and dilemmas in special education in rural settings. First, one may examine ethical

considerations for special educators in rural America. Second, a discussion about the

ethical considerations of teaching self-determination in rural settings may take place.

Third, ethical practices and parental participation in rural special education may be

considered. Fourth, one may examine ethical issues in special education and teacher

preparation for rural settings. Finally, a look at ethical dilemmas in rural special

education may occur.

Ethical Considerations for Special Educators in Rural America

The unique ethical challenges faced by educators in rural schools and

communities are complex. Geography, population density, and availability of specialized

services create unique contexts for students. For students who live in rural settings, their

experiences reflect a contemporary challenge to the ideals of society and the universal

education of all learners. Expectations for ethical practice may be explored through an

investigation of theoretical constructs, codes of ethics, and standards for professional

practice.

Ethics can be linked to the rights of individuals in society. All teachers who work

with special needs students agree to hold themselves and others accountable for ethical

principles and standards.

Special education has been filled with ethical dilemmas since the beginning of the

Individuals with Disabilities Act. With challenges posed by this law, teachers must find

ways to provide a free appropriate education for all students. Despite educators’ best

2


efforts, special education continues to be filled with ethical dilemmas. Many of these

revert to decision makers at the local level.

Confidentiality and procedural safeguards are of particular interest to special

educators. Special education teachers should try to improve their skills. They should

grow as skilled educators and share information with their team mates to promote an

effective team atmosphere. Scientifically based practices are, fortunately, becoming

common in classrooms, as supported by the Nation Center on Special Education

Research (Rude, 2008).

Ethical issues are found both subtly and boldly in the field of special education.

They are found in interventions, policies, research, and teacher education. Special

education teachers often rely on complex foundations of justification for what they do

and how they do it. For a field so filled with complexities of interest, it is surprising that

so little attention has been paid to the study and development of applied ethics.

There are four major ethical challenges in special education. The first is the need

to examine the political and moral stories and ethical frameworks in which to understand

them. The second is the need for expressing character morality. The third is the need to

look at special education within the context of a liberal democracy. The fourth is the

need to develop an ethical basis for discussion on the nature and representation of

knowledge.

All teachers would aspire to be a part of an ethical framework and would like to

reaffirm their intentions to do good for students and their families. As such, initiatives

for advocacy on behalf of students with disabilities came mainly from educators involved

3


with them, their families, and friends. Special education is a field where the good

intended by educators is meant to improve educational outcomes for all students.

Choice morality is familiar to special educators. In choice morality, a moral

choice becomes the utmost of importance in responsibility. Principle-based ethics are

emphasized by authors writing about educational policy. Character morality is an

alternative to choice morality. The focus is not on choice but on character. Both of these

moralities have been the central theme of special educators and psychologists throughout

the 20th century.

Since the development of the modern field of special education, the call to create

an appropriate education for all students has taken up the full attention of special

educators. Three main issues appear as among the most critical to sustaining the work of

special education. The first is recognizing the implications of the minority status of

students with disabilities. The second is inclusion of all students in general education as

both an empirical and ethical issue. The third is the debate about what is included in

knowledge must be open and respectful (Paul, 2001).

Everyone who works with exceptional children agrees to hold themselves and

others accountable for ethical principles and standards. These are in keeping with the

established ideals that guide professional practice. Some of these principles are

developing a high educational quality of life, promoting and maintaining high levels of

competence and integrity in professional practice, exercising objective professional

judgment, and engaging in professional development that benefits individuals with

disabilities. Other principles include striving to advance knowledge and skills for

improved education, operating within standards of the profession, avoiding unethical or

4


illegal acts that violate the code of ethics, and seeking to uphold and improve laws for the

delivery of special education and related services (Rude, 2008).

Ethical Considerations in Teaching Self-Determination in Rural Settings

Self-determination is a major concern in special education. It includes a set of

skills and behaviors that have been described as self-regulatory, goal oriented, and

independent. There has been a great deal of research, practice, and articles published on

this subject. It is critical to examine certain ethical issues that may impact successful

educational practice in regard to self-determination.

Self-determination can be examined in the context of rural special education.

There are four main considerations for this: 1. the impact of self-determination on the

lives of persons with exceptionalities; 2. how to determine what is ethical in teaching

self-determination; 3. attention may be focused on certain issues related to self-

determination programs that are especially relevant to education in rural settings; and 4.

certain issues that rural teachers must address when dealing with self-determination

instruction in an ethical manner.

Self-determination is an important skill that all people with exceptionalities

should work on. Self-determination training for people with disabilities is important, and

professionals must ask themselves how to make ethical choices in regard to the nature of

instruction in self-determination.

There are several considerations that may affect the challenges of teaching self-

determination instruction in rural settings. Rural America is becoming more diverse, and

about a third of growth in rural areas is the result of international migration. Enrollment

patterns must also be considered. In 2005, the number of public rural schools reporting

5


severe under-enrollment was more than in all other locations. Also, student success is

related to success in adult outcomes. Poverty is noted to a significant degree in rural

settings. Finally, there is a problem with the availability of qualified teacher candidates

for special education positions.

New federal plans place significant demands on educators. Teachers in rural

areas often teach more than one academic subject and may lack access to needed

professional development courses. However, No Child Left Behind makes them be

highly qualified in each of the subjects at the same rate as teachers from non-rural

districts. Additionally, rural schools do not receive the funding they need. Rural public

schools receive a smaller portion of their funding from federal sources than their urban

counterparts (Smith, 2008).

Ethical Practices And Parental Participation In Rural Special Education

Parental participation in special education is very important (Kauffman, 2009).

The original 94-142 provided an equal partnership for parents of students with

disabilities. Parents are encouraged to participate in planning the most appropriate

education for their children (Lashley, 2007).

Special education professionals should follow a code ethics created by the

Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). It establishes a set of principles under which all

special educators are obligated to adhere. Educators should engage in professional

activities that benefit individuals with disabilities and their families. Professionals should

as a matter of ethical responsibility implement techniques and strategies to ensure the

involvement of families of children with exceptionalities.

6


Research shows that rural parents of children with exceptionalities often do not

participate to the same extent as their urban and suburban counterparts. It is difficult for

rural school districts to build and maintain ongoing collaborative relationships with

parents due to the lack of resources and services. Parents in rural areas have less

resources. These include parent support centers, educational libraries, and parent

advocates. This can make them more susceptible to professional dominance at meetings.

As partners, parents are given equal authority in making decisions about their

child’s education. This may include helping special educators interpret and discover the

significance of available information in creating the student’s IEP. This places a moral

obligation on special educators to prepare and assist parents in becoming informed

decision makers in their child’s education. Unfortunately, research shows that sometimes

parents have negative experiences in becoming such equal decision makers. Parents must

be involved at each level of their child’s educational program in order to create true equal

partnerships. Research has also shown that parents voice concerns that educational

programs are made in advance without parental input and that parental feedback is not

sought or valued. The reality is that parents are not as involved in the education of their

children as anticipated by educators. Parental interaction also goes beyond passive

involvement in the educational process, but also includes negative experiences and

interactions with educators.

Special educators are both legally and ethically responsible for ensuring parental

involvement in the special education process. Research shows that the field of special

education has not adequately involved parents as equal partners. There should be a

greater effort to increase parent’s knowledge base regarding all aspects of special

7


education. This includes increasing special educators’ knowledge about the family,

community, and cultural factors that influence students with disabilities. Teachers should

be sensitive and respectful about meeting times and structure. An IEP meeting should be

conducive to collaboration and communication. This means that each member’s personal

circumstances are considered when developing meeting locations and agenda items

(Trussell, 2008).

Special Education and Teacher Preparation in Rural America

Research shows that ethical considerations in teacher preparation programs is

considered important, and yet it receives little attention in most teacher training

programs. The lack of educational professionals who are prepared to adequately handle

ethics and morality has been a concern in teacher education. Interest in the topic has

reappeared in the last ten years since the American Association of Colleges for Teacher

Education created a taskforce for it. It was called the Teacher Education as a Moral

Community and explored and defined the ethical dilemmas involved in teaching. It

considered moral and ethical issues in schools and higher education and the combination

of diversity with moral and ethical issues.

As such, teaching should be guided by ethical standards that provide all students

with high quality educational opportunities. It should ensure their learning opportunities

and skills toward becoming productive citizens. Also, education should teach them

critical thinking and problem solving skills needed to live in a democratic society.

Often, rural communities have high unemployment rates and low socioeconomic

levels. Students in rural areas may experience increased levels of underachievement

when compared with students in urban areas. Teaching in rural areas also poses

8


challenges for educators to provide a high quality education that ensures the academic

and social development of all students (Sileo, 2008)..

A code of ethics becomes necessary in these contexts. Professional ethics is a

system of moral principles that relates to behaviors or a specific professional group.

Ethics is a set of reciprocal processes that make critical reflection referring to

professional obligations and behaviors possible. The American Council on Rural Special

Education adopts ethical values designed to foster quality education for persons with

disabilities in rural areas, promote cultural diversity, and develop collaborative

partnerships to benefit rural residents (Skinner, 2010).

Teachers encounter a number of ethical issues. These concerns may be especially

relevant in rural areas where teachers must adapt to students’ academic development in

light of local values, physical isolation, harsh weather, limited fiscal resources, and

potential confidentiality issues that may arise in small towns. Ethical teachers actions are

guided by several factors. Included in these are beliefs, attitudes, and characteristics that

reflect courage, empathy, honesty, impartiality, and practical wisdom. All of these

inform classroom behaviors and practices (Sileo, 2008)

Teacher training programs must reflect the field of special education, which is a

field where educators develop and deliver programs and services for individuals with

disabilities. Teachers are confronted with many ethical issues as they work with students

with various disabilities. Almost every profession requires its members to act

responsibly toward the people they serve (Margalit, 2000). This includes teachers

treating their students in ways that favor individual welfare in accordance with best

9


practice. Rural special educators face particular difficulties due to lack of funds,

personnel and services, cultural differences, and geography.

The IDEA passed in 1997 requires that all students have access to participate in

the general education curriculum, and has posed several issues for special educators.

Research on how to teach this group is somewhat limited. However, new research has

been discovered on how to teach academics to some of the students in this group. This

affects teacher preparation.

No Child Left Behind in 2002, mandates assessment of all students on state

content standards in academic areas. This usually takes the form of standardized tests.

This has led to alternative assessment procedures that assist school districts to collect

assessment scores for students with disabilities that can be used in a school’s adequate

yearly progress. In terms of teacher preparation, teachers must have content knowledge

in the academic subjects for which they were responsible and state teaching certification

at grade levels to which they were assigned (Courtade, 2008).

Teachers must be prepared to work with students with severe disabilities and must

deal with particularly tough issues as they work as part of a team responsible for

determining the education of a student with disabilities. This is particularly true when

considering the relative value of inclusive or separate classroom settings.

Unfortunately, there has been little agreement on how teachers should be prepared

to deal with these issues. There is also little agreement on how teachers should be

prepared to work with students with severe disabilities. There is even less consensus on

which teachers should receive such training. The focus and content of these programs is

often open to interpretation. School systems face many challenges in recruiting,

10


employing, and retaining teachers who work with students with sever disabilities

(Courtade, 2008).

Ethical Dilemmas in Rural Special Education

It is perhaps possible that ethics will lead to precepts that reflect the best of who

we are and the best we hope to offer the students we service. It is impossible to provide

individualized and meaningful special education services unless ethical issues are

addressed on a continual basis. Determining what is just, what is right, what ought to be

done is important.

Ethics are legalistic statements regarding the values one brings to a particular

endeavor. Ethical dilemmas develop when a conflict arises between competing values

represented by the differing opinions of at least two people. This can also include

competition among various values held by one individual. The creation and maintenance

of a language of ethical standards can be helpful to parents, teachers, administrators, and

specialists. Given the vast range of ideals teachers hold close and try to understand and

use in their daily lives, ethics should be part of a long-term self-examination and part of a

continual conversation in our professional lives.

Only the very best is good enough for students and other beneficiaries of the

education and human services special educators provide. Holding the bar high is how

educators sustain the notion of doing good, and doing good well. It also has the

unexpected benefit of having a foundation upon which to reflect on the journey as

professionals.

Education and human services by their very nature imply an ethical imperative.

These are the areas of endeavor that represent work designed to alter the development

11


and other characteristics of the students and family members who are served. It invites

special education teachers to develop a language of ethics, and a commitment to social

justice, since the law requiring the development of such services has its foundation in

social justice. It implies that there is a higher calling, a need to move toward ideals in

special education. This calling should be void of consideration of sanctions for not acting

ethically that seem to be at the center of discussion of ethical codes. This idea of moving

toward ideals in the work teachers do, and the creation of a language of ethics, should be

at the center of answering basic questions: Why do educators do what they do? And,

why do they care (Berkley, 2008)?

Conclusion

In conclusion, there are a number of factors to consider in examining ethics in

special education in rural settings. First, ethical considerations for special educators in

rural American may be examined. This includes an examination of the unique challenges

faced by educators in rural schools. Next, the ethics in teaching self-determination in

rural settings may be explored. Self-determination consists of a set of skills that are self-

regulatory, goal oriented, and independent. Then, parental involvement and ethical

practices may be considered. Parental involvement is crucial to student success. Further,

special education and teacher preparation may be examined. Presently, ethical

considerations receive little attention in most teacher training programs. Finally, ethical

dilemmas in rural special education may be explored. Ethical dilemmas must be

considered on a continual basis in order to provide meaningful special education services.

12


References

Berkley, T. & Ludlow, B. (2008). Ethical dilemmas in rural special education: a call for

a conversation about the ethics of practice. Rural Special Education Quarterly.

27 (1/2), 3 – 9.

Courtade, G., Ludlow, B. (2008). Ethical issues and severe disabilities: programming

for students and preparation for teachers. Rural Special Education Quarterly.

27 (1/2), 36 – 42.

Kauffman, J & Hallahan, D. (2009). Parental choices and ethical dilemmas involving

disabilities: special education and the problem of deliberately chosen

disabilities. Exceptionality. 17: 45 – 62.

Lashley, C. (2007). Principal leadership for special education: an ethical

framework. Exceptionality 15 (3), 177 – 187.

Margalit, M. (2000). Issues in special education research within international

perspectives. Exceptionality. 8 (4), 299 – 304.

Paul, J., French, P. (2001). Ethics and special education. Focus on Exceptional

Children. 34(1), 1-16.

Rude, A. & Whetstone, P. (2008). Ethical considerations for special educators in rural

America. Rural Special Education Quarterly. 27(1/2), 10-18.

Sileo, N & Sileo, T. (2008). Ethical issues in general and special education teacher

preparation.: an interface with rural education. Rural Special Education

Quarterly. 27 (1/2), 43 – 54).

Skinner, M. & Gurganus, S. (2009). Principles of ethical practice: cases for illustration

13


and dialogue. Intervention in School and Clinic. 45, 3 – 13. doi:

10.117/1053451209338396

Smith, T., Beyer, J. (2008). Ethical considerations in teaching self-determination:

challenges in rural special education. Rural Special Education Quarterly. 27

(1/2),27 – 35.

Trussell, R. & Hammond, H. (2008). Ethical practices and parental participation in

rural special education. Rural Special Education Quarterly. 27 (1/2), 19 – 23.

14