Supervisory Leadership post 3

Reflections on Supervisors role for Educational Assistants

The purpose of this study is examine the literature surrounding the policy and processes around communications between educational assistants (EA) and their supervisors who provide them with direction and support. Effective, timely, and clear communications from supervisors in regards to the duties and responsibilities for educational assistants is critical for them to support the students as terms of their employment. The supervisory processes of EAs are not clear because of the confusion and the lack of direction from various levels of supervisory persons.

From my personal experience, I have seen EAs used mostly ineffectively in the classroom and in limited roles and organizational tasks such as photocopying, note taking, and scribing. Many students in middle and senior years do not wish to have EAs in close proximity due to the stigma that is attached to their inability to fit into the classroom environment, or the perceived deficiency in learning that will socially ostracize them from their peers. As well, I was denied the opportunity to conduct a field research into this topic, which could also point to either political or legal consequences surrounding the effective use of EAs or the lack of supervisory obligations and oversight within divisional power structures. There is a need is for greater consistency between provincially mandated directives for divisional and school-based administrators and teachers to identify the roles and responsibilities for trained and untrained EAs. Ongoing training in collaborative teams is necessary between all supervisory personnel and educational assistants, which probably should be an addendum to the Appropriate Educational Programming legislation (Public Schools Act, 2005); effectively removing the current ambiguity surrounding the duties and obligations by all concerned stakeholders.   

The literature reviewed, which relies heavily on US studies, and the Manitoba research, which contains smaller sample values, may not be practical for scalability of procedural or policy adjustment, either for larger school divisions or provincially. Additionally, most Manitoba data is qualitative, anecdotal evidence rather than quantitative statistical in nature and so may not be accepted as definitive proof for strong action on provincial or divisional levels. Research cited from US sources contain policy and legal frameworks, which may not apply to solutions provided in in a provincial setting.

There are several questions, which will be addressed in this literature review. Why is there so much inconsistency between educational directives and the implementations of the policies surrounding the effective use of educational assistants? Are there institutional or human resource barriers to these processes? Are there means by which these processes of communication, and thereby the supervision and support, could be improved? Why are supervisors not living up to their obligations to EAs? Why are EAs expected to act in a professional manner when many of them have no formal training or professional standing in an organization and many have no union representation, which would require such professionalism?
LITERATURE REVIEW.....Omitted for brevity

Summary (Findings, Conclusions, Recommendations)

Trying to extract meaningful value from an under-researched topic, which contains human, political, and financial complexity at each level, is difficult under any circumstances. All levels of school administration play key roles in the success or failure of collaborative relationships between EAs and teachers. They are ultimately accountable and need more oversight by the Department of Education (Vogt, p.106) because too many decisions are passed down from the department with little oversite on their implementation, effectiveness, and success.

The research clearly points to a greater need for pre-service training and ongoing professional development (PD) for those required to supervise educational assistants, so that they are then able to organize, lead, direct, motivate, coach, train, and supervise the work of EAs. Too many EAs are inadequately supervised and thus required to work without guidance due to teachers’ inadequate competency to manage the work of another adult in the classroom. (Vogt, pp.45-47). Efficient educators always seek to minimize the amount of administration required to achieve a positive result with their learners. Having another adult in the classroom creates anxiety around management and supervision, thereby increasing stress and decreasing productivity and efficiency (Vogt, p. 42). The supervisory guidance that is provided for novice and veteran teachers differs greatly as well; the constant they both share being that both groups are poorly prepared and have little ongoing training or time to develop the crucial mentorship/supervisory roles needed for success(Vogt, pp. 69-72). Trial and error solutions and IEP meetings, if there are any, are where brief collaborations take place.

Another consideration for the success of utilizing EAs effectively is the training and support given to the teachers and educational assistants. The appropriate professional development and training for EAs and supervisors, needs to be provided on a regular, on-going basis to build relationships and capacity within the school in the interest of better meeting the complex needs of the funded learner in a regular classroom setting.

From the cross-reference table of policy and procedure documentation (Table 1), some broad conclusions can be drawn. Most divisions reviewed have little in the way of systematic professional development either internally or otherwise. Professional development becomes another obligatory administrative chore for an already overburdened supervisor with a finite budget and thus remains often neglected or perfunctorily addressed.

A number of divisions require EAs to act with professional responsibility. Setting a professional code of conduct for many employees who do not have professional credentials seems disingenuous and naïve, unless they either receive pre-service training, experience, or ongoing, relevant, certified education as a condition of their employment. Professionalism is equated with confidentiality with student and school information. If a requirement for confidentially is a high priority, then such compliance can only be achieved by having individuals bonded as a condition of employment.( non-disclosure agreements---breach of contract terminated)

 My experience at the high school level has been that IEPs and Adapted Learning Plans are emailed to teachers at the beginning of the semester, but ongoing, progress- monitoring meetings do not take place and accountability at many levels is non-existent. When provincial funding money is made available to a school or division, no matter how well budgeted, the EA option for the provision of appropriate education becomes the default. The reality is that many EAs are hesitant to be assertive and ask for direction when they are untrained and new to a school climate, especially if they are on a term contract and hoping to be reemployed. The diverse curricula and subject specificity in a high school setting, combined with the learning environment changes between classes and different teacher styles and pedagogy and classroom expectations, creates confusion for both the EA and the student, as they get four sets of differing supervisory interpretations of the rules. This variety adds more confusion and less continuity than the students with special needs receive in a K-8 educational setting.

Given the lax criteria and foundations for entry into such an important and demanding job, it is no wonder that there is stress, apathy, and high turnover and low retention rates for EAs in Manitoba schools. Some EAs are certified paraprofessionals and some have no training at all; some have job security and support, backing by union membership while many do not; resulting in a recipe for confusion. It is unrealistic for supervisors to expect an EA to act in a professional manner if they have no certified credentials as an educational assistant. Additionally, while a teacher might enlist this individual to assist in the classroom as mandated by the Principal, they would have no professional or personal obligation to include such an individual as a skilled partner in education, because of their novice status and lack of training.  If there is no ongoing commitment to job-specific training for individual EA, teachers may see them as babysitters and helping assistants for organizational tasks, rather than as a full-fledged collaborator for support in the educational process.

Supervisor training on how to best utilize trained and untrained EAs is also of paramount importance if these supervisory processes are to be successful.  Some areas that could be addressed are: assertiveness training, collaboration skills, basic skills for working with other adults, and effective communication skills,

Given that the predominate style of educational leadership is still hierarchical in most educational institutions in North America, (Smith & Piele, 2006), the financial and organizational expediency of hiring EAs with funding monies attached, outweighs the collaborative, relationship-building approach that most of the literature recommends for the effective communication of roles, duties and the supervision of educational assistants. Unless MTS or the provincial government mandates changes to the role and supervision of educational assistants and ensure implementation, the status quo will prevail. Continued miscommunication and confusion will not be beneficial to any members of the learning community.

Implications for Further Research

There are several recommendations to be made based on the results of this study. There is an absence of literature identifying where the responsibility lies for preparing teachers to work with educational assistants. (Vogt, p. 105). More research needs to be allowed within divisions without fear of reprisals in order to make meaningful changes in the status quo.

Further research should occur into the real or perceived barriers for the implementation of training EAs, teachers, and administrators for improving the success of the EA model of support for inclusive classroom learning. Research can also be done in the area of the reticence of administration to accept a more active leadership role in communication, collaboration, and directions for the teacher /EA relationships. Further research with principals and divisional administrators can help clarify the speculation about the levels of bureaucracy, autocratic leadership style, time and resources demands, or the inability to share leadership roles as impediments to providing the necessary to supports to sustain the use of EAs for support. Improved professional development for all stakeholders, clarity of the definition of roles and responsibilities, and accountability at all levels in the hierarchy are needed to reach the legislated mandates for appropriate and inclusive education. (Zaretsky, 2010, p. 262). Questions like: What of the dynamics in classrooms between EAs and immediate supervisors? What would a collaboration model between them look like in a K-8 setting and a high school setting? Why isn’t there more leadership from the Department of Education with more clearly defined procedures and implementation guidelines? These questions need to be answered,  primarily for the well being of students with special needs as well as for the EAs. By providing answers, we are doing the best job of education we can do with limited time, money, and human resources we are alloted.

References

Beautiful Plains School Division (2012). Roles and Duties of Educational Assistants. Retrieved  April 23^rd 2016 from http://www.beautifulplainssd.ca/uploads/9/6/3/0/9630957/schoolboardmemberhandbookjuly2012.pdf

Brandon School Division (2016). Handbook for Substitute Employees. Retrieved  April 23^rd 2016 from https://www.bsd.ca/Division/HR/SUB_Handbook.pdf

Brandon School Division (2014). Joint Job Evaluation: Job Profiles. Retrieved April 23^rd 2016 from https://www.bsd.ca/Division/HR/JE_JP.pdf

Frontier School Division (2006). Employee Handbook for Non-Union Support Staff.  Retrieved Feb 2^nd 2016 from http://www.frontiersd.mb.ca/HR/SiteAssets/Pages/Documents-and-Forms/Support%20Staff%20-%20Employee%20Handbook.pdf

Frontier School Division (2011). Educational Assistant Handbook. Retrieved Feb 2^nd 2016 from https://www.frontiersd.mb.ca/HR/SiteAssets/Pages/Documents-and-Forms/Educational Assistant Handbook.pdf

Frontier School Division (2011). Frontier School Division Performance Assessment and Development Plan Educational Assistants. Retrieved Feb 2^nd 2016 from https://www.frontiersd.mb.ca/HR/SiteAssets/Pages/PerformanceEvaluation/Educational%20Assistant.pdf

Government of Manitoba (2005). Bill 13: The Public Schools Amendment Act (Appropriate

Educational Programming). Winnipeg, MB: Author.

Government of Manitoba. Educational assistants in Manitoba schools. Retrieved from

http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/docs/support/ed_assistants/educational_assistants.pdf.

Harder-Robson, G. (2009). Resource Teachers' Perceptions of the Utilization of Educational Assistants and Implications for Future Practice (Unpublished masters dissertation). University of Manitoba, Winnipeg

Manitoba Education and Training (2009). Educational assistants in Manitoba schools. Retrieved From http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/docs/support/ed_assistants/educational_assistants.pdf

Park West School Division ( 2010). Administrative Procedure Manual Human Resources: Evaluations Educational Assistant AP: 201C. Retrieved March 23^rd 2016 from http://www.pwsd.ca/Policies/Section%202/C/201C-Educational%20Assistant%20Evaluation.pdf

Park West School Division (2010). Administrative Procedure Manual Human Resources: Job Descriptions Educational Assistant AP: 213B. Retrieved March 23^rd 2016 from http://www.pwsd.ca/Policies/New%20Admin%20Manual/Introduction%20to%20Administrative%20Procedure%20Manual%203.pdf

Pine Creek School Division (2010). Pine Creek School Division Policy GDB. Retrieved March 23^rd 2016 from http://www.pinecreeksd.mb.ca/uploads/2/3/9/7/23979590/gdb.pdf

Pine Creek School Division (2009). Pine Creek School Division Regulation ihb-r. Retrieved March 23^rd 2016 from http://www.pinecreeksd.mb.ca/uploads/2/3/9/7/23979590/ihb-r.pdf

Rolling River School Division (2010). Rolling River School Division Regulation: Educational Assistant Job Description. Retrieved March 22^nd 2016 from https://www.rrsd.mb.ca/governance/PolicyManual/Documents/GDAAA-Educational_Assistant.pdf

Smith, S. C., & Piele, P. K. (2006). School leadership: Handbook for excellence in student learning (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Turtle Mountain School Division (2009). Turtle Mountain School Division Policy 1-L. Retrieved February 1st 2016 from http://www.tmsd.mb.ca/procedures/K/K-1l.pdf

Turtle Mountain School Division (2009). Turtle Mountain School Division Section K: Position Descriptions, Procedure K-1H. Retrieved February 1st 2016 from http://www.tmsd.mb.ca/procedures/K/K-1h.pdf

Vogt, R. (2011). Co-Constructing Collaborative Classrooms: Novice and Veteran Teachers Perceptions of Working with Educational Assistants (Unpublished masters dissertation). University of Manitoba, Winnipeg

Zaretsky, J.D. (2010). A Study of Northern Manitoba Principals‟ Perspectives Regarding New Special Education Legislation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).University of Manitoba, Winnipeg