Alternative Avenues for Collaborating With Special Education Paraprofessionals

Introduction

Ms. Davidson’s Perspective:

Ms. Davidson opens the door to her classroom and welcomes in a group of eager first graders. Students walk into a brightly lit, ample space with sit spots on the carpet. Ms. Davidson waits by the smartboard as the students enter. Last to enter is Joey and his paraprofessional, Ms. Pearson. Joey runs a quick lap around the room, investigates Ms. Davidson’s music stand and projected welcome message, does another brief jog to the back of the classroom before being directed to his seat. Ms. Davidson inwardly sighs, “Why can’t Ms. Pearson redirect him? She comes in, and the first thing she does is pull out her phone.” Gently, Ms. Davidson asks Joey to show he is ready for music, and the class begins.

Ms. Pearson’s Perspective:

Before music class, Ms. Pearson waits with Joey in the hallway. Joey is usually last in line so that he has space to wiggle. “Joey has so much energy today,” thought Ms. Pearson, “at lunch, he ran out of the cafeteria. I hope he will settle a little in music.” As Ms. Pearson and Joey enter the room, Joey runs a quick lap around the room. Ms. Pearson waits to see if he will find his sit spot on his own. One of his learning targets for this quarter is to demonstrate independence in following classroom expectations, such as entering and finding his place. Ms. Pearson wonders if Ms. Davidson will redirect Joey and begins to speak to Ms. Davidson when Joey, with Ms. Davidson’s help, finally finds his spot. Ms. Pearson watches Joey for a few minutes. As he begins to settle, she pulls out her phone. “The first break I’ve had today,” she thinks to herself. “Five minutes, just five minutes to check my email. Joey is doing the best he has all day.”

Perhaps you have experienced a similar situation. As music educators, we often become so engrossed in planning lessons, organizing materials, and the minutia of teaching that we forget to seek the perspective of the paraprofessional and vice versa. Recently, I completed a study in which I examined the collaborative roles of three music educators and three paraprofessionals, of varying years of experience, in a type of learning community called a community of practice (CoP). In a CoP, individuals share their lived experiences and expertise to develop new ideas to practice within their own classrooms (Wenger et al., 2002). Through participation in the CoP, participants learned that their initial perceptions of one another were biased due to a misunderstanding of one another’s professional roles. In discussing their instructional needs, students, and work frustrations, participants discovered similarities in their professional roles and gained a greater appreciation for one another. I also found that music educators were often unsure how to include paraprofessionals in their instruction (Grimsby, 2022). In addition, special education teachers may give paraprofessionals specific guidance on how to support their students. This information may not always be communicated to the music educator by the special education teacher.

Many music educators and paraprofessionals want to collaborate, but lack the planning time to do so (Grimsby, 2020, 2022; Marjerus & Taylor, 2020). A lack of collaborative planning time between music educators and paraprofessionals to share expectations and student learning targets may cause negative perceptions and miscommunications (Grimsby, 2022; VanWeelden & Heath-Reynolds, 2018). Scheduling and employee status are common barriers to collaborative planning between music educators and paraprofessionals. However, several commonplace technologies may provide music educators and paraprofessionals with alternatives to collaborative planning. Implementing these technologies may allow for instructional strategies to be shared, new techniques to be developed, and assistive technologies to be incorporated into instruction. In addition, a positive collegial relationship between music educators and paraprofessionals also may develop.

Who Are Paraprofessionals?

In response to a shortage of licensed teaching professionals in the early 1950s, school districts began to hire individuals to assist teachers with clerical work such as making copies, refilling supplies, or monitoring recess, lunch, or hallways during transitions between classes (Wallace, 2003). During the late 1970s and early 80s, schools saw an increase in Title I, Head Start, and special education services (Wallace, 2003). In response, school districts hired more individuals as teacher’s aides, and job responsibilities began to shift from clerical to assisting with instruction. Teacher aides were then later referred to as paraeducators or paraprofessionals (Pickett, 1999). These professional labels are often interchangeable between school districts; however, these individuals may not share the same job responsibilities. Some paraprofessionals may shelve books in the library or assist the physical education teacher in instruction. Others may only have clerical duties such as making copies of teaching manipulatives or taking students to and from lunch and recess. More often than not, paraprofessionals who work with music educators specialize in working with students with disabilities.

For this article, I will refer to those individuals who work with students with disabilities daily, special education paraprofessionals (SEPs). SEPs are assigned to work with one specific child or a small group of children who have a disability. In the past three decades, there has been an increase in SEPs employed by school districts (Giangreco & Doyle, 2002). According to the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA), SEPs are required to have the necessary knowledge, training, and skill to support the learning needs of the students with whom they work (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA], 2004). However, as IDEA may be interpreted differently from state to state, credentials for SEPs are not consistent at the state or national level. As a result, some SEPs may not have the necessary education to provide instructional support in each educational setting they bring students to, despite many being the primary instruction providers (Giangreco et al., 2002; Giangreco & Doyle, 2002; Hughes & Valle-Riestra, 2008; Marks et al., 1999).

Benefits of Collaboration

Often, collaboration allows individuals to feel valued as they share their knowledge and expertise to produce new knowledge, develop materials, or create plans of action that may benefit those they teach. Researchers have shown collaborative planning can improve student learning outcomes and promote a positive school climate (Burstein et al., 2004; Carter et al., 2009). General education teachers and special education professionals are provided collaborative planning time and access to student information, such as individual education plans (IEPs) and 504s. Collaborative planning and access to student information are not always provided to music educators and SEPs. Music educators may teach the entire school or the same students for contiguous years, depending on the music setting. As a result, music educators have a vast knowledge of those whom they teach. SEPs also work closely with the students they are assigned and bring knowledge of those they work with into the music setting. As music educators and SEPs bring with them different expertise regarding those they teach, collaborative planning is necessary.

In reading much of the peer-reviewed literature on music educators and paraprofessionals, it seems that music educators desire collaborative planning time with their SEP colleagues to understand their collaborative roles (Grimsby, 2022; Marjerus & Taylor, 2020). Music educators may wish to learn more about students with disabilities, while SEPs may want to know how to support student learning in the music setting (Grimsby, 2022; Giangreco & Doyle, 2002). Collaborative planning between music educators and SEPs is a rare occurrence; however, collaborative planning could benefit student learning outcomes. Collaborative planning also may provide a remedy to feelings of isolation felt by music educators (Sindberg & Lipscomb, 2005) and SEPs (Hughes & Valle-Riestra, 2008) and increase feelings of value and respect within their school communities. In addition, collaborative planning may encourage a more positive perspective of and communication between these colleagues (Malain, 2011; VanWeelden & Heath-Reynolds, 2018).

Suggestions for Collaboration

As collaborative planning is rare, music educators and SEPs need alternative avenues to communicate their expectations. As stated earlier, I engaged music educators and SEPs in a Community of Practice (CoP) that examined their perceptions of one another and the instructional practices necessary for collaboration. CoP meetings were mostly guided by participants. Although I provided a few initial questions based on interviews or observations of them teaching, most meetings were a space where participants shared ideas, asked questions about students and lessons, provided one another guidance, or vented about their week or the profession. Participants stated that using several commonplace technologies provided space for collaborative communication and instructional support without allocated planning. These technologies included email, a secured shared drive, and Discord^®.

Before I detail each technology below, there are a few issues with using technology as an alternative to collaborative planning. The first is Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) laws. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA, 1974) protects and provides governance over access to student educational information and records. Identifiable student information, such as disability categories or IEP information, should never be shared over email or messaging apps. As music educators, we must be careful when discussing students through any means of communication. Another issue is SEP access to technology. Unlike music educators, many SEPs are not provided a computer by their school district. SEPs may use school computers, but, in my experience, the school did not provide the SEP with a personal computer. SEPs used computers in the library, computer lab, or their personal device (i.e., their phone).

Messaging Apps as a Collaborative Tool

Messaging and team applications on smartphones have been around for several years. Various messaging apps are available, Mumble, Slack, Teamspeak, Ventrillo, and Wire, to name a few. These team apps allow businesses to task manage, message, and share files. Unfortunately, not all are free to use, are user-friendly, or enable file sharing. I have found Discord^® to be beneficial in meeting the collaborative needs of music educators and SEPs.

Discord^® is a VoIP (voice over internet protocol) that allows users to communicate via text, voice calls, video-only calls, and share files in either group or private chat. Initially designed for video gamers, educators have recently employed Discord^® as a collaborative tool. One benefit of Discord^® is that it is free and accessible via a smartphone. Another advantage is the ability to file share over the app. Music educators and SEPs can use Discord^® to communicate student or instructional needs daily. Shared instructional materials also can be discussed and prepared for students in advance. Discord^® also provides collegial support in ways not typically afforded music educators and SEPs due to the nature of their positions (Grimsby, 2022).

As most music educators and paraprofessionals have access to a smartphone, the use of Discord^®, or a similar app, could offer a virtual collaborative space (see Figure 1). SEPs and music educators could communicate student and instructional needs “in real-time.” Often, when a need arises, the students’ issue is communicated between music educator and SEP in earshot of the class. Employing a digital collaborative space for immediate communication might allow music educators and SEPs to address student needs without discussing them in front of students. Although many music educators may be concerned with pausing a lesson to use these apps, allowing students a minute or two to sing for one another or to check a recorder or ukulele fingering with a neighbor, for example, would provide students enough engagement, while the music educator collaborates with the SEP.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

An example of a music educator and SEP using Discord to collaborate.

SEPs also could prepare those students they work with for music by reading lessons ahead of time. Knowing the lesson ahead of time would allow the paraprofessional to know when to engage student/s during class and when to observe. Some students struggle with not knowing what to expect when they arrive to music. If the SEP has the lesson in advance, they can prepare that student for music which may allow them an easier transition into music activities. In addition, SEPs may be unsure how to participate in music due to their perceptions of their musicianship (Grimsby, 2020). This may result in the SEP hesitating to participate in or assist with musicking activities. SEP hesitancy also may negatively impact their desire to collaborate. Sharing “how to videos” that allow SEPs to practice a song or instrument fingering ahead of time may increase their engagement in the classroom. SEPs, too, could send videos on how to incorporate assistive technology in the general music classroom. Using a digital collaborative space would allow for instructional materials to be prepared in advance by the SEP and provide an opportunity to build a collaborative relationship.

If a messaging app seems a viable option for readers, I advise them to communicate first with their administrator. Some districts may have stringent policies regarding personal devices used by staff for school purposes. If a messaging app is approved, I suggest music educators and SEPs leave any identifiable information out of the messaging. Similar to the example email above, I advise using alternative descriptors such as time/day of class, grade level teacher’s name, or grade level letter (i.e., 1A, 3B, and 5D).

Shared Drives as a Collaborative Tool

Most schools have a local network that houses general information, grade level data, and administrative communication. Music educators and SEPs could utilize a shared drive as an alternative to collaborative planning. A shared drive would also be the most secure option for electronic communication and sharing of lessons and student information. Although there is no ability to communicate in real-time through a shared drive, it provides a localized space where music educators and SEPs can address instructional needs.

Similar to a messaging app, music educators and SEPs could share student learning targets, lesson plans, and created manipulatives to support student learning on a shared drive. Unlike email and messaging apps, pseudonyms may not be necessary, only first names or initials as the local shared drive is hosted by the district and utilized school wide. The shared drive also is where some schools localize individualized education plans (IEPs). Providing a list of students with IEPs and their learning targets in a single location would provide a quick reference tool for the music educator. Rather than scouring through a 20+ page IEP document to find student learning goals while planning, the music educator could refer to the SEP or special educator prepared document in the shared drive. Lesson plans and instructional materials also could be uploaded onto the shared drive. The music educator and SEP should choose a specific day to upload lessons. The SEP can prepare instructional materials to support student learning upon reading the lesson plans. Finally, the SEP can upload the needed instructional materials for the music educator to print and prepare for their instruction. Examples of instructional materials that SEPs may create are music-specific Picture Exchange Communication boards (PEC), visual schedules, token charts, enlarged printed notation, assistive technology guides, or other teaching materials necessary to support student learning needs (see Figures 2 and 3).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

This is a visual schedule of an elementary general music class.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Music PEC Board.

The use of a shared drive will require advanced planning on both the music educator and SEP. Email also is necessary with this collaborative tool to communicate questions regarding shared materials and to inform colleagues when items have been uploaded. As with email and Discord^®, a shared drive has its problems. The most significant issue using a shared drive is the time required to upload material, communicating that materials have been uploaded, and SEP device access. As stated earlier, many SEPs are not provided a school computer nor planning time to read through or upload documents.

Advocacy

I am aware of the gaps within these suggestions, FERPA issues, access to devices, and app approval. Our reality as music educators is that we must be creative in finding unconventional ways to collaborate with SEPs. I suggest using commonplace technologies as an alternative to collaborative planning based on research and personal practice (Grimsby, 2020, 2022; Marjerus & Taylor, 2020; VanWeelden & Heath-Reynolds, 2018). I also encourage readers to see technology as a temporary solution as they advocate for collaborative planning.

Often, many articles that center on teaching music to students with disabilities include the suggestion to advocate for planning. While I support these suggestions, advocating for collaborative planning is easier said than accomplished. As it applies to the school community, scheduling has been the largest barrier to collaborative planning (Grimsby, 2020, 2022). In working on many schedule committees, I found that general education teachers’ planning was considered first and was the basis of the specialist instructional schedule. Special education teachers then organized their schedules around the specialist teaching schedule to have collaborative planning with the grade level teachers. Schedules developed as the one above leave no time for SEPs to collaborate with music educators. When seeking collaborative planning with SEPs, some music educators found that SEPs were available only before or after SEP contract hours (Grimsby, 2020). In addition, administrators may be uncomfortable asking SEPs to meet with music educators outside of their contract time without compensation (Marjerus & Taylor, 2020).

How do we advocate for this time that will benefit student learning and collegial relationships? I suggest that the music educator begins with the technology options above, emphasizing the conversation with their administration that these are temporary solutions. Once administrative permission is received to use outside apps, such as Discord^®, provide your administration with the articles listed in this article’s “advocacy” sidebar. These articles provide evidence of the positive effects of collaborative planning time on student learning and collegial relationships. From there, document the successes you and the SEP see within the music setting from using technology as planning. Has lesson flow improved? Has student engagement increased? Have you learned instructional strategies that benefit all students from your interactions with the SEP? Share these observational data with your administration to advocate for in-person collaborative planning. When advocating, suggest bi-monthly or monthly meetings rather than weekly. This suggestion may provide an entry point for allocated collaborative planning time to become long term. As you advocate for collaborative planning, also ask to be included in the IEP. While it may be impossible to attend every IEP meeting, the perspective of the music educator is important. Consistent and well supported goals across grade level, art, physical education, and music classes can only benefit a students’ academic and social success.

Conclusion

The use of commonplace technologies, while not ideal, would provide avenues for communication between music educators and SEPs like Ms. Davidson and Ms. Pearson. As a result, these professionals could communicate collaborative expectations and instructional needs with one another. Clearly communicated expectations of professional roles might alleviate SEP feelings of inadequacy and music educator frustration. The use of email, a messaging app like Discord^®, or a shared drive also may allow for positive collegial relationships to develop and improve student learning outcomes. I hope these suggestions provide music educators a place to start when seeking to collaborate with SEPs. For students with disabilities to receive the most equitable music education, collaboration between music educators and SEPs is essential.

Supplemental Material