Content area
Abstract
The California School Employees Association defines a paraeducator as a person who assists classroom teachers and other certificated personnel in instructing reading, writing and mathematics. The paraeducator's job duties have expanded to meet growing demands on instruction and student diversity. Their school duties mirror those of a typical teacher; paraeducators connect schools to communities, manage challenging student behaviors, and provide direct instruction to students. Although paraeducators are assuming roles that are reminiscent of a classroom teacher, the current paraeducator entry level requirements and professional development do not mimic that of a typical teacher. Paraeducators rarely receive any formal training before or during their experience. As a result, much of the training that paraeducators do receive is dependent on trial and error, "on the job" training and the quality of supervision they receive from teachers. Thus, paraeducators' skills and competencies vary because paraeducators are subject to different opportunities and expectations from individual supervisors. The research on paraeducators provides a wide range of empirical contributions, but the body of literature is limited in depth. The most glaring gaps revolve around how paraeducators provide instructional services to students, particularly given their lack of training and support.
This study investigated how special education paraeducators completed the instructional responsibilities of their duties. Drawing on ecocultural and activity theory perspectives, I used a mixed methods study that investigated the unique factors that impact the special education paraeducator's instructional practice within the small group instructional setting for students with mild to moderate disabilities. Findings indicated that paraeducators enact a variety of goals through everyday routines; they also access a variety of social, material, and cultural resources. But, the paraeducators' practices are highly influenced by external factors such as the district, school, classroom, and social contexts and settings. Findings also suggested that there was an underlying power structure that limited the paraeducators' control over their everyday routines.
