Co-teaching in gifted education

Special education administrators, or those who occupy special education positions at the school district level, have traditionally fulfilled operational functions related to student programs and services while at the same time overseeing legal compliance of educational stakeholders with associated federal, provincial (State), and municipal (district) regulations (Bettini et al., 2017). Emerging research demonstrates that these special education bureaucrats have begun to undertake pedagogical responsibilities in the governance of special education programming due to increasing political demand for the social inclusion of students with disabilities in the classroom environment (Cameron & Lindqvist, 2013).

A consideration of the most recent edition of the Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB) Special Education Plan (2016) confirms that in addition to executing cross-disciplinary professional coordination, legal compliance, and public relations with families concerned with special education, the teaching and learning processes of special education within the Board is a core priority for the special education supervisory officer. Specifically, the Learning Supervisor of Gifted Education "supports school and board staff in addressing students with complex Special Education needs" (TVDSB Special Education Plan, 2016, p. 10). This collaborative partnership encompasses a pedagogical mindset in that students with gifted exceptional needs lie at the forefront of administrative decision-making among classroom teachers, itinerant school personnel, and board staff.

As an elementary occasional educator, I have come to experience the complexity of special education on a daily basis in the school communities to which I teach tens, hundreds, and thousands of students, each of these with their own unique educational strengths and needs. However, I do not have an understanding of the administrative considerations that factor into the construction of gifted education for students with giftedness. To inform me more about this, I interviewed an administrator of gifted education and asked her to share personal perspectives about gifted education, what might constitute an ideal working environment for an administrator of gifted education, and the general challenges or bottlenecks and such resolutions associated with planning and implementing a gifted education program.

According to the administrator, gifted education consists of "many working parts," each with "complexity" and assigned "importance" in the delivery of the program. Always attentive to "the Federal, Provincial, and Regional legal mandates," specifically "how each of these have been evolving and what is changing," the administrator of special education must "acknowledge the MOE's response to these laws, regulations, and memoranda when they come across my desk." When tailoring the provincial expectations for gifted education, administrators of special education in particular school districts are generally understood to "co-construct board and school policies with policy actors," including "board officers, principals, families, organizations, and teachers." In her role, the interviewed administrator reported that she helped infuse "project-based learning" with schools to support gifted learners, with this particular pedagogical intervention now "in full swing" from the Ministry of Education and further advocated by organizations like "The Association for Bright Children of Ontario" and "The Ontario College of Teachers." Furthermore, project-based learning is an act of "co-creation" with school administration and teachers in the board in that these school actors "implement the resources made available to them online in our Board's website according to their own unique learning environment." This "adaptability" among what is perceived as an "interdisciplinary team approach," featuring "unique skill sets from different disciplinary backgrounds that only help the learner in the end," is what makes the gifted education environment "ideal for me. ... I can always report back to committee how well things are going on in our schools, and back this up with measurables," including "EQAO data, OSRs, and other reporting information."

When asked about the challenges confronting gifted education, the administrator of special education volunteered that "special education is itself an evolving construct," in that "fiscal resources must always be used to support shifts in documentation practices, learning programs, training and development, and demand for resource personnel." The learning environment in gifted education is powerfully shaped by "budgets" coupled with "localized demand," meaning input from "families," "school trustees," and "board committees" steer the direction of gifted education each year and throughout the course of schooling on a daily basis. "The parts that move gifted education can be sluggish," with numerous procedural mechanisms in place to ensure that decisions are "made fairly, accountably, and equitably for all parties." A byproduct of such inclusivity in educational policy and practice is "the time it takes to get from point A to B." "Sometimes I hear of trustees reporting of their frustration in hearing the time it take a family to send their child to a gifted program of their choice." "There are many documents to be signed, potential waiting lists, transportation arrangements, and transition plans to be put in place." Each of these considerations takes a lot of resources and "are often spread out across more than one school community."

The most effective response to such taxing obligations for gifted education is "co-teaching," meaning that "everyone has a vital part to play." Administrators, teachers, families, and students -- "we are all learners and teachers in some capacity ... so we might as well make it an enriching experience for all."