General Orientation in Special Education A number of competencies in the inquiry form dealt with background knowledge in various aspects of special education outside the field of mental retardation. As a whole those in the broader aspects of special education aside from mental retardation rated very low. While it should be pointed out that these items were considered not so much unimportant as less imporant in a small and highly competitive list of competencies, the frequency with which teachers of the retarded meet handicaps other than retardation in the classroom may well raise questions on this attitude of the teachers. Increasing interest in the complex disabilities of the more severely retarded child and the constant improvement in diagnostic facilities may also cause reconsideration of this problem. One item dealing with this subject directly-"a knowledge and understanding of the education and psychology of all exceptional children”—was rated rather low [64]. A knowledge or understanding of methods of teaching the socially and emotionally disturbed was somewhat more highly valued [41]. The ability to teach mentally retarded having multiple handicaps was rated low [89]. The competencies dealing with speech problems of the mentally retarded were, with one exception, also rated relatively low. The one the teachers valued most was the ability to differentiate between speech defects attributable to mental retardation and those attributable to physical and emotional causes [44]. Other competencies, such as the ability to give speech correction to the mentally retarded with only occasional help of a correctionist [82], or under the direction of a correctionist [85], and knowledge or understanding of methods of teaching the speech handicapped [86] were all rated low. In view of the frequency of speech defects in the mentally retarded, these findings may deserve further study. Interpersonal Relationships A rather large number of competencies in the inquiry forms dealt with questions which may be grouped under the general head of interpersonal relationships. These items are concerned more or less with certain functions such as counseling, interpreting special education to persons outside the field, and teamwork with allied agencies. The teacher's own ability in counseling and guiding the child in his personal adjustment was, as a whole, given high rank in the ratings. The rank varied somewhat according to the degree of remoteness from the classroom and the degree of specialization required. Thus, visiting the homes of the children and gaining the cooperation of the parents rated very high [11]. Counseling retarded children on their emotional problems and personal attitudes [14] and social problems [19] ranked high. Helping parents get information which would assist them in facing the problems arising from having a retarded child in the family [43], and counseling mentally retarded children on their vocational problems and life goals [53 and 54] ranked near the middle of the distribution. Problems of interpreting special education to groups outside the specialty produced a wide range of importance ratings by the teachers. Interpreting special educational programs to regular school personnel [23], and to the general public [31] ranked among the upper third of the items. Interpreting the special education program to related professional personnel outside the school and to nonprofessional workers in the school organization was considerably lower [70 and 72 respectively]. In other words, the teachers seemed to feel their main responsibility in interpreting the program lay with school personnel and the general public. Ability to participate as a member of a team with allied agencies ranked near the middle or lower half of the distribution. Cooperation in work with other members of a professional team in helping parents with their child's social and emotional problems and in understanding their child's limitations and potentialities ranked [42] and [50] respectively. Rated still lower down the list were the items: helping as a team member on problems of vocational placement of the children [73] and knowledge of services of national professiona! organizations interested in the retarded child [76]. Apparently teachers accepted as their prinicipal teamwork responsibility cooperation with others in solving problems of social and emotional adjustment of a child and his family. Administrative and Legal To matters of administration, beyond the ability to fit the special program into a total school program [38], the teachers assigned relatively little importance. This is in spite of the fact that in many school systems the teachers of the retarded must assume the burden of much of the leadership in program development. Knowledge of arguments for and against separation into special classes [88], the ability to work with school administrators and such persons as architects in planning classroom facilities [83] and administration of a program for the mentally retarded [97] all ranked low. Similarly, matters dealing with the legal status of the retarded were considered of lower importance. For example, knowledge of provisions for the retarded under existing laws regulating education [63], vocational training [75], employment practices [80], and juvenile delinquency [84] were all rated low. The Most Important Competencies An examination of the most important competencies reveals an extremely interesting picture of the main outlines of the job today, as seen through the eyes of the teachers. These teachers gave high priority to recognizing the child as an individual [1], and to skill in individualizing the curriculum to meet his needs [4]. ● They rated understanding the child very highly, especially along lines of social and emotional adjustment [12], and being able to help him develop acceptable patterns of behavior [2]. They emphasized an understanding of causes of maladjustment [10], and the need for counseling with the child [14], [19], and his family [11]. They implied that the teacher's attitude should be one which combines objectivity with sympathetic understanding of the retarded pupil's problems and limitations [9]. They emphasized the necessity of developing practical self-sufficiency in the child [6]. They were especially interested in health education [7]. They were interested in the child's academic progress, especially in reading [3 and 8], and arithmetic [16] the fundamentals of "literacy." The academic curriculum received more stress than its traditional twin, industrial arts and homemaking [58], [46]. This may be due to various factors: many of the teachers had been "regular" teachers; there are incessant pressures on them to emphasize academic skills. In the education of the mentally retarded there may also be a genuine drift away from traditional emphasis on "practical" handwork and domestic arts experiences. • Successful teachers of the mentally retarded showed a good deal of interest too, in preparing these children for participation in community life [18], [20], including a broad range of social experiences [17]. This is due in part, no doubt, to their being teachers of educable children in regular public schools. Nevertheless, the emphasis on giving them community-type experiences is significant. A great deal of interest was evidenced in the organization of curriculum around meaningful and socially useful experiences [13], a trend which is closely in line with general education. In general, and in situations where the number of competencies in a category permitted it, the teachers tended to rank the practical and immediate aspects higher than the theoretical and remote. This tendency is illustrated frequently; an example is the series on behavior and emotional development, page 31. In some instances a hierarchy developed in the ratings on the basis of the degree to which technical preparation in other fields would seem to be an essential element in the competence. An illustration of this may be found in the series on making educational interpretations from various types of child study data (page 31). The teachers apparently favored delimiting their jobs to workable size, in which teaching is the central core. Although they expressed a high degree of willingness to cooperate on joint problems with other professions, they seemed to think that there was a limit beyond which they did not wish to take primary responsibility. Effect of Recency of Preparation on How did the recency of preparation of the 150 superior teachers affect their ratings of relative importance of the list of competencies? Seventy-five of these teachers had the major part of their initial specialized training prior to January 1, 1946, and 75 since that date. A comparison of ratings of the importance of competencies by these two groups yielded only 3 competencies on which there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in the ratings given. These are shown in the following tabulation: Items which showed SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE between PRIOR-SINCE There were no significant differences on the basis of recency of training in the remaining 97 items. In general, it must be concluded that few differences exist between the views of these two groups. The reasons for these results are not immediately discernible. It may be that attending inservice workships, reading professional journals, and other community activities have given both groups of educators a common frame of reference. COMMITTEE REPORT AND TEACHER EVALUATIONS The general plan adopted for this study was to derive two sets of competencies by independent methods. This was done because it was thought that more significant results would be achieved if the competency committee and the specialists preparing the list for the teachers to evaluate worked independently. In an exploratory study this method undoubtedly had advantages. Substantial overlapping was expected. It was thought, however, that this overlapping would in itself be a partial validation of the lists and that, to the degree The method of calculation of these differences is described in appendix C, page 79. that the two lists failed to overlap, they could be considered as supplementary, each to the other. This procedure, however, did introduce some problems in analysis and interpretation. It led, in the first place, to differences in phrasing and organization of the ideas expressed. In many instances there was a partial overlap of two or more ideas which made a rigorous point-by-point comparison of the two lists difficult. The committee was encouraged to identify and describe competencies without respect to existing standards. Its only limitation was that it should confine itself to competencies different in degree or kind from those required for regular teaching of normal children. The committee worked as a group and members had the advantage of cross checking with each other over a period of time in an effort to reach a consensus and to arrange the findings in a logical sequence. This committee report was prepared by a group of persons all of whom were recognized educators in the field of mental retardation. In the setting of this study, extensive and intimate experience with the educational problems of the retarded child was given precedence over the somewhat broader perspective which might have been obtained by including social workers, doctors, school |