chose to leave their special education teaching positions, while the other group chose to
stay, and therefore, represent very different social constructions of similar situations.
Forty current and former tenured special education teachers comprised the
participants for our two cases. Data were collected from current tenured special
education teachers and former tenured special education teachers whose employment
with the HSD included at least one contract year after the 1997 amendments to IDEA to
allow for experience with increased legal requirements. Data were collected through
focus groups, semi-structured interviews, the Left Hand and Right-Hand Column Case
Method (LHRHCCM), and review of appropriate documents. Data were analyzed using
text analysis software, content analysis, and pattern matching as they were collected to
make decisions regarding the research design (Argyris and Schon, 1974). This
emergent design allowed the voices of current and former tenured special education
teachers to be heard regarding attrition or retention decisions with the HSD.
Data analysis
We analyzed our data through pattern matching, content analysis, and the use of the
text-analysis software CATPAC. Data were unitized, sorted, and coded through an
open and axial coding process facilitated by application of the CATPAC text analysis
software. CATPAC is based on a neural network model of connections, was used to
analyze the data by reading the text for interrelationships between words as well as
identify common themes (Woelfel, 1990).
Findings
Four salient findings were derived from data analysis. We use numerous quotations
from current and former tenured special education teacher to provide a rich narrative
associated with our findings. We simultaneously present and discuss each finding.
Finding 1
Current tenured special education teachers (CTs) reported that they want to be listened
to and have their needs considered by HSD administrators. CTs want to be heard in
several areas including paraeducator shortages, student behavioral support, teacher
and student materials, and teaching assignments.
The majority of CTs shared perceptions about the special education agency as a
good support system that responded to their needs. One CT stated, “Any time that
I have questions or am upset about something, I’ve gone straight to the special
education administrator for this building, and I’ve always felt that I’ve been listened to
on 99 percent of the cares and concerns that I’ve had”. Even in situations where CTs
stated they did not get what they had requested, they felt the special education agency
administrators listened to them. One CT said:
They have always responded in a way that helps me. It may not always be the way that
I want it, but everything has been addressed and taken care of. I think that our special
education agency realizes that I love and enjoy doing this job.
Some CTs’ perceptions of the special education agency were not as positive. They
stated their requests were not answered. They perceived they were not being listened
to or having their needs met. As one CT shared, “There’s a conflict between the school
district and the special education agency. We [. . .] shouldn’t have to beg from the