Bernal, C., & Aragon, L. (2004). Critical factors affecting the success of paraprofessionals in the first two years of Career Ladder projects in Colorado. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 205-213.

This article focuses on those factors that led to paraprofessionals' successful completion of their first year in a postsecondary setting. Specifically, this paper addresses the conceptual framework upon which these programs were developed, takes the reader through a series of steps utilized in recruitment and preparation of paraprofessionals for entry into their postsecondary experience, and discusses the strategies used in assisting paraprofessionals for successful completion of their first year of study in a college setting.

Clewell, B. C., & Villegas, A. M. (2001). Absence unexcused: Ending teacher shortages in high-need areas:Evaluating the pathways to teaching careers program. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

This is a recently completed a six year evaluation of the Pathway to Teaching Careers program. This program funded by the DeWitt-Wallace Readers Digest fund trained people from three specific groups; emergency licensed substitutes, Peace Corps volunteers and paraeducators, to become teachers. They found that paraeducators were the most likely to remain in the teaching profession for more than three years and were more likely to work in urban areas upon completion of their training. Given the sometimes-desperate need for teachers in most urban school districts, this finding is a compelling argument for investing in paraeducators.

Dandy, E. (1998). Increasing the number of minority teachers: Tapping the paraprofessional pool. Education and Urban Society, 31(1), 89-103.

A program at Armstrong Atlantic State University designed to increase the number of minority teachers by recruiting paraprofessionals was selected to be one of the national Pathways to Teaching careers programs. The program wanted to address Georgia’s need for minority teachers by training classified school district employees, mostly paraprofessionals. Those selected had exemplary work records, better than average grades and a sincere commitment to teaching. The program provided tuition support for courses leading to a teaching certificate as long as the participants maintained a 2.5 GPA, attended all program-sponsored activities and agreed to work for the school district for at least three years after graduation. Unique features of the program included Friday replacements for participants to attend classes and program events, a GPA monitoring program, connecting the classroom with the community by having participants attend many community and cultural activities and special workshops.

Epanchin, B.C., & Wooley-Brown, C. (1993). A university-school district collaborative project for preparing paraprofessionals to become special educators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 16(2), 110-123.

Like many paraeducators who become teachers the participants in this project were working, going to school, and balancing family responsibilities. A standard curriculum was used – based on state requirements, but packaging and delivery were altered to avoid redundancy and irrelevancy. They taught courses in blocks, at night and weekends. Faculty drove 140 miles round trip to accommodate needs of students who did not want to drive. Staffing courses was hard; faculty did not want to continue. The project also used highly skilled teachers as adjunct faculty to co-teach classes. Technology was infused into the program. They also used mentor teachers and ongoing peer support.

Genzuk, M., & Baca, R. (1998). The paraeducator-to-teacher pipeline: A five-year retrospective on an innovative teacher preparation program for Latina (os). Education and Urban Society, 31(1), 73-88.

The Center for Multilingual Multicultural Research at the University of Southern California (USC) founded the Latino Teacher Project initially using funds from the Ford Foundation. The primary objective was to increase the number of Latinos entering the teaching profession. Current paraeducators were the focus of the program that provides them with financial, social and academic support during the time that they study to become bilingual teachers.

Genzuk, M., Lavadenz, M., & Krashen, S. (1994). Para-educators: A source for remedying the shortage of teachers for limited English-proficient students. The Journal of Educational Issues for Language Minority Students, 14, 211-222.

This article makes recommendations for the design of career ladder projects designed to train for paraeducators to become teachers of language minority students. The authors point to the need for financial, academic, and personal support for paraeducators who are becoming teachers.

Gordon J.A. (1995, June). Preparation for urban teaching: Post B.A. paraprofessionals. Paper presented to the faculty of the University of Washington. Seattle, WA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 383 652).

The author outlines a paraprofessional career ladder program designed as a partnership between the Seattle Public Schools (SPS) and Western Washington University (WWU). Based on their experiences with this program, the speaker concludes that successful program to train diverse teachers need to include; “clear requirements and responsibilities, fair an equitable treatment of students, giving particular attention to first-generation college students, especially those who have been out of school for several years, faculty who are willing and able to work with urban students, provisions for mentoring students, financial support, and flexibility of class scheduling.”

Gursky, D. (2000). From para to teacher. American Teacher, 84(8), 8. Retrieved from: http://newfirstsearch.oclc.org

This brief article discusses the strong match there is between the need for more teachers and the large number of paraprofessionals working in the nations’ schools. While not all paraprofessionals want to become teachers, a large number of would like to enter the profession. A barrier to their entering the profession is financial resource to complete college. School district grow-your-own programs that assist with this financial burden are recommended.

Haselkorn D., & Fideler, E. (1996) Breaking the class ceiling: Paraeducator pathways to teaching. Belmont, MA: Recruiting New Teachers, Inc.

This study of paraeducator to teacher programs concludes that (1) too many children are currently being consigned to dead-end futures; (2) too many teachers who want to do better, don't have the tools to reach them and teach them; and (3) too many paraeducators who want to do more continue to bump up against a class ceiling. A class ceiling that is denying the nation their contributions at a time when America's teacher recruitment, development, and diversity challenges require engaging our best minds, our deepest values, our strongest commitments.

Kaplan G. R. (1977). From aide to teacher: The story of the career opportunities program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 139 798).

This report tells the story of the Career Opportunities Program. In the 1970’s this was the first career ladder program for paraeducators in the United States.

LeTendre M. J. (1998). Paraprofessionals: A resource for tomorrows’ teachers. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 3 (2), 107-110.

Nittoli J. M., & Giloth, R. P. (1997). New careers revisited: paraprofessional job creation follow-income communities. Social Policy, 28, 44-61.

Reviews the state of programs today that were designed to help low-income communities increase their economic potential by employing people from their own neighborhoods and provide them training to work in human services positions in their own neighborhoods. The goal was not only to lift low income neighborhoods out of poverty by providing jobs to residents who came from the populations that they served, but to also provide additional education and training that would create career ladders into the professional ranks. Paraeducators career ladder programs are mentioned.

Pearl A., & Reissman, F. (1965). New careers for the poor: The nonprofessional in human service. New York: Free Press.

This book is the original plan for the New Careers Program in the 1960’s and 70’s.

Rintell E. M., & Pierce, M. (2002). Becoming maestra: Latina paraprofessionals as teacher candidates in bilingual education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 466 463).

This paper describes the experiences of Latina paraeducators who were recruited into a career ladder project to become teachers in Salem Massachusetts. Many of these paraeducators were immigrants from Central and Couth America. They became paraeducators in several ways. The two most common pathways were either parent volunteers who were hired because of their bilingual skills or teachers from other countries who became paraeducators in the U.S. while trying to figure out the system for becoming certified here. The paper discusses how they used their cultural traits to become successful in the teacher education program.

Rueda R. S. & Monzo, L. D. (2000). Apprenticeship for teaching: Professional development issues surrounding the collaborative relationship between teaches and paraeducators. Santa Cruz: University of California, Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence.

Paraeducators in this study had one of three working relationships with teachers: Paraeducator as clerical support, Paraeducators as implementer of teacher plans, or Paraeducator as apprentice teacher. This role differentiation influenced the paraeducators desire to go on to become teachers. Those whose roles were more clerical in nature had less interest in becoming teachers than those whose roles were more apprentice like.

Safarik L. (2001). Lives in transition. Utah: National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals. Retrieved from: http://www.nrcpara.org

This article reviews a multi-agency career ladder training program for paraeducators. The personal stories of several participants are shared.

Sandoval-Lucero, E. (2006). Recruiting paraeducators into bilingual teaching roles: The importance of support, supervision, and self-efficacy. Bilingual Research Journal., 30 (1), 195-218.

This mixed methods study examined the self-efficacy beliefs of paraeducators who became bilingual teachers and paraeducators who did not to explore the possibility that self-efficacy plays a role in paraeducators’ career decisions. Data were collected through three sources: a survey, career goal statements, and interviews. Fourteen participants were included in the study. There were qualitative differences and significant quantitative differences between the two groups. Those who became bilingual teachers described work environments and duties that promoted the development of their teacher efficacy. Those who remained in the paraeducator roles described very different work environments. The study highlights the importance of clearly defining paraeducators’ roles and responsibilities in ways that utilize their skills, abilities, and interests, and promote their career development.

Villegas A. M., & Clewell, B. C. (1998) Increasing the number of teachers of color for urban schools, lessons from the pathways national evaluation. Education and Urban Society, 31(1), 42-61.

Data reported in this article was collected as part of a five-year evaluation of the Pathways program. The 27 sites in the paraprofessional and emergency-certified teacher strand are the focus of the article. The evaluation was both quantitative and qualitative. The study found that he components of successful programs include: Forging partnerships between the teacher education program and urban school districts; using flexible and varied criteria to select participants; providing a network of academic and social support; modifying the teacher education curriculum; securing tuition assistance.

Villegas A.M., & Clewell, B.C. (1998). Increasing teacher diversity by tapping the paraprofessional pool. Theory Into Practice, 37(2), 121-130.

Wall S., Davis, K. L., Winkler Crowley, A. L., & White, L. L. (2005). The urban paraprofessional goes to college. Remedial and Special Education 26(3), 183-190.

This article reviews an urban paraeducator training program established between three partners to help paraeducators attend college to meet the NCLB requirements. In the first two cohorts of students who began the program, they learned many important lesions about paraeducators attending college. First, that paraeducators bring many strengths including more closely matching the demographic make of their students. However, they need quite a lot of academic and personal support in order to be successful in college level classes.

White R. (2004). The recruitment of paraeducators into the special education profession: A review of progress, select evaluation outcomes, and new initiatives. Remedial and Special Education 25 (4), 214-218

This article provides an argument for the recruitment of paraeducators into the special education teaching profession. It provides a rationale for the recruitment of paraeducators and a report on the state-of-the-art of paraeducator career ladder programs in special education.

Blalock G. (1991). Paraprofessionals: Critical team members in our special education programs. Intervention in School and Clinic, 26(4), 200-214.

Demchak M. A. & Morgan, C.R. (1998).  Effective collaboration between professionals and paraprofessionals.  Rural Special Education Quarterly, 17 (1), 10-15.

This article provides information about the roles of team members. It provides a table that differentiates between the duties and responsibilities of general education teachers, special education teachers and paraeducators who work together in teams to serve the needs of children with disabilities.

Daniels V.I. & McBride, A. (2001). Paraeducators as critical team members: Redefining roles and responsibilities. NASSP Bulletin (85) 623, 66-74.

This article is a review of literature the literature on paraeducators as team members and teacher-paraeducator collaboration. It is written from the perspective of what principals need to know about paraeducators as team members.

Logan A. (2001). Collaboration between teachers and special needs assistants in mainstream primary schools. REACH Journal of Special Needs Education in Ireland, 15(1), 33-42.

Morgan J., & Ashbaker, B.Y. (2001). 20 ways to work more effectively with your paraeducator. Intervention in School and Clinic, 36(4), 230-231.

Miramontes O. B., (1990). Organizing for effective paraprofessional services in special education: A multilingual / multiethnic instructional service team model. Remedial and Special Education, 12(1), 29-36.

The author recommends joint training for MMIS team members specifically on issues of 2nd language acquisition and its affect on learning, how to interpret and administer tests that are written in one language and translated to another, and information on how to strengthen school-community relations. The article emphasizes team collaboration to solve many problems associated with translators and second language programming for students.

Palma G. M. (1994). Toward a positive and effective teacher and paraprofessional relationship. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 13(4), 46-48.

Aragon L. (2003). Factors to consider when selecting paraprofessionals for
participation in a teacher preparation program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Denver.

Causton-Theoharis J. (2003). Increasing Interactions between students with severe disabilities and their peers via paraprofessional training. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Chopra R.V. (2002). Parent-paraeducator collaboration in inclusion: reality and issues. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Denver.

D'Aquanni M. M. (1997). The role of paraprofessionals in quality inclusive educational programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University.

Dover W. F. (2001). Instructional management of paraeducators in inclusive classrooms: The perspectives of the teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University.

Doyle M. B. (1995). A qualitative inquiry into the roles and responsibilities of paraeducators who support students with sever disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.

Genzuk S. M. (1995). Integration factors affecting commitment to educational and occupational goals for latino paraeducators. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California.

Lavadenz M. C. (1994). Factors related to the teaching aspirations of chicano/latino paraprofessionals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California.

Milner C. A. (1998). Paraprofessionals in inclusive classrooms: Working without a net. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of North Dakota.

Mueller P. H. (1997). A study of the roles, training needs, and support needs of Vermont's paraeducators. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Vermont.

Prigge D. J. (1996). Supervising the special education paraprofessional in inclusionary settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.

Reamer R. B. (1995). The effects of video self-modeling and self-assessment training on the delivery of instructional strategies provided by paraeducators working with children with developmental delays. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Houston.

Riggs C. G. (1996). Dimensions of the paraeducator experience: Facilitating the inclusion of children with identified special education needs in general education classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lesley College.

Sandoval-Lucero E.M. (2004) The role of self-efficacy in paraeducators’ career decisions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Denver.

Smith S. D. (2000). From paraprofessional to credentialed teacher: Motivational factors that influence career pathways in special education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco.

Stallings C.F. (2000). The identification of paraprofessional training needs within the context of inclusive education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. North Carolina State University.

Sullivan J. P. (1995) The relationship between the actual role and ideal role of paraprofessionals in secondary schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco

Torres R. L. (1998) Meeting the demands for quality teachers: A case study of bilingual paraprofessional-to-bilingual-teacher training program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Colorado at Boulder.

Wallace T. L. (1997). The role of paraprofessionals in effective transition programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota.

Werts M. G. (1998) Child academic engagement related to proximity of paraprofessionals. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Pittsburgh.

Ashbaker B. & Morgan, J. (2000, January). Bilingual paraeducators: What we can learn from Rosa. NASSP Bulletin, 84(612), 53-56.

Ashbaker B.Y., & Morgan, J. (2001). Growing roles for teachers' aides. Education Digest, 66(7), 60-65.

Bennett T., Deluca, D., & Bruns, D. (1997). Putting inclusion into practice. Exceptional Children, 64(1), 115-131.

This study found that classroom teachers needed more support in class as well as help in modifying and adapting the classroom environment and activities, and training on techniques for working with kids with disabilities. The authors mention paraprofessionals specifically.

Benshoff J.J., Eckert, J.M., Riggar, T.F., & Taylor, D.W. (1995). Parameters of paraprofessionalism: Exploring the myths and realities associated with paraprofessionals in rehabilitation settings. Journal of Rehabilitation Administration, 19, 133-143.

Bernstorf E. D. (2001). Paraprofessionals in music settings. Music Educators Journal, 87 (4), 36-40.

Black S. (2002, May). Not just helping hands. American School Board Journal, 189(5), 42-44.

Based on recent research and data on paraprofessionals, this article describes the roles paraprofessionals play in schools and builds an argument for career ladders that help them become teachers. The number of paraprofessionals in public schools has grown faster than the number of teachers. When properly trained, supervised, and supported paraprofessionals can successfully contribute to student achievement and their work is an excellent training ground for future teachers. In fact many of them do want to become teachers but need support to enter school and complete their degrees. Research is cited that indicates paraprofessional career ladder programs are a good investment for schools districts and that paraprofessionals could help ease the current teacher shortage.

Blodgett E. G. & Miller, J. M. (1996). Speech-language paraprofessionals working in Kentucky Schools. Journal of Children’s Communication Development, 18(1), 65-79.

The roles of SLPs associated with a medical model have now shifted to a role more tailored for the educational model.

Brown L., Farrington, K., Ziegler, M., Knight, T., & Ross, C. (1999). Fewer paraprofessionals and more teachers and therapists in educational programs for students with significant disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(4), 249-252.

This article describes what other studies have found to be problems with the employment of paraeducators in educational settings. It also makes recommendations for eleven specific things that can be accomplished by paraeducators and recommends that we need to increase the number of paraeducators working in schools, not decrease them.

Chopra R. V., Sandoval-Lucero, E., Aragon, L., Bernal, C., Berg de Balderas, H., & Carroll, D. The paraprofessional role of connector. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 219-231.

This study revealed that close relationships between parents and a paraprofessionals and children and paraprofessionals. These relationships provided the basis for the paraprofessionals to act as connectors between parents and teachers, students and teachers, students and their parents, parents and community services. Paraprofessionals shared how they provided connections between the student and curriculum by using specific strategies aimed at helping students learn. The study also uncovered the barriers and factors that hamper or help the paraprofessional role as a connector. The findings present implications for future practice in terms of how schools can support and encourage this role towards improving everyday instructions for all students.

Clayton T. (1993). From domestic helper to "assistant teacher": the changing role of the British classroom assistant. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 8(1), 32-44.

Crosswait-Degen A., Larson, L. L., Marquiss, D., Wragge, M., Christensen, J. E. (1987, Fall). Suggestions regarding the training of speech-language pathologists as supervisors of supportive personnel. Rocky Mountain Journal, 12-15.

This review of the literature addresses the SLP role and the paraeducator’s role. The authors suggest training for SLPs to be supervisors, evaluation of supervisory performance, and minimal educational requirements of assistants.

Fletcher-Campbell F. (1992). How can we use an extra pair of hands? British Journal of Special Education, 19(4), 141-143.

French N.K., & Gerlach, K., (1999). Topic #1 Paraeducators: Who are they and what do they do? Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(1), 65-69.

Explores the changing roles of both teachers and educators. Practical suggestions for educators and paraeducators in inclusive programs; Knowledge of the issues associated with the assignment of tasks to paraeducators; Three sets of considerations.

French N. K. (1999). Topic #2 Paraeducators and teachers: Shifting roles. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(2), 69-73.

Explores the changing roles of both teachers and educators. Practical suggestions for educators and paraeducators in inclusive programs; Knowledge of the issues associated with the assignment of tasks to paraeducators; Three sets of considerations.

Gartner A., & Reissman, F. (1974). The paraprofessional movement in perspective. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 53, 253-256.

Johnson M.M., Lasater, M.W., & Fitzgerald, M.M. (1997). Paraeducator: Not just an aide. Journal of Staff Development, 18(1), 6-11.

Lamont L. L..., & Hill, J. L. (1991). Roles and responsibilities of paraprofessionals in the regular elementary classroom. British Columbia Journal of Special Education, 15(1), 1-24.

This article report on a research study. A questionnaire asked regular education teachers and paraeducators about the actual, preferred, not appropriate and not applicable tasks paraeducators were performing in regular education classrooms where special education students were integrated. The study took place in 5 school districts in British Colombia. The participants’ responses were similar for actual and preferred tasks. Tasks listed as not appropriate were instructional in nature; those that were not applicable were in the area of personal care and assistance to students.

Loschert K. (2003). No para left behind. NEA Today, 21(6).

Reviews the NCLB legislation as it relates to paraeducators.

MacVean M.L., & Hall, L.J. (1997). The integration assistant: Benefits, challenges and recommendations. Australian Disability Review, 2/97, 3-9.

Miramontes O. B., Nadeau, A., Commins, N. L. (1997). Restructuring Schools for Linguistic Diversity . New York: Teacher’s College Press.

This article has implications for paraeducator role in bilingual classroom. The authors state that the primary language plays an important role in developing deeper understandings of a topic – as in social studies concepts, which may be taught in English. The native-language paraeducator can play important role here helping to deepen the students understanding of a topic by having conversation with them in their native language. The article recommends cross-grade groupings and specifies that when paraeducators take a group, their instruction must be directly coordinated and supervised by certificated licensed teachers.

Morgan J., Ashbaker, B.Y., & Forbush, D. (2000, November/December). Special helpers. American School Board Journal, 187(1), 54-56.

Paoni M. F., Wise, S. P., Marshall, M. & Kelly, R. (1996). Classroom Aide-Teacher Relationships. NASP Communiqué. p. 22.

The authors discuss the role of the school psychologist around classroom aide-teacher issues. They are involved in selection, orientation and on the job training of aides. They assist aides in developing skills in behavioral observation. They work with aides to make certain that intervention plans are implemented correctly and monitored on a regular basis. They also help to expand the roles of aides (e.g. through participating in behavior management plans or home-school communication strategies).

Palladino P., Cornoldi, C., Vianello, R., Scruggs, T. & Mastropieri (1999). Paraprofessionals in Italy: Perspectives from an inclusive country. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(4), 253-256.

Pickett A. L. (1989). Restructuring the schools: The role of paraprofessionals. Washington D. C.: Center for Policy Research, National Governor’s Association.

Pickett A. L. (2003). Paraeducators in educational settings: Framing the issues. In A. L. Pickett & K. Gerlach (Eds.) Supervising paraeducators in educational settings: A team approach (2 nd ed.) (pp. 1-44). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

An introduction to the book that recounts the history of the use of paraeducators in education. The editor also summarizes current issues surrounding the employment and training of paraeducators.

Pickett A. L., Likins, M., & Wallace, T. (2003). The employment and preparation of paraeducators, the state of the art – 2003. Utah: The National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals. Retrieved from: http://www.nrcpara.org

A review of literature on the current issues facing the field of education regarding the employment, training, preparation, and career development of paraeducators.

Pickett A. L., Vasa, S. F., & Steckelberg, A. L. (1993). Using paraeducators effectively in the classroom. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Foundation.

Radaszewski-Byrne M. (1997). Issues in the development of guidelines for the preparation and use of speech-language paraprofessionals and their SL supervisors working in education settings. Journal of Children's Communication Development, 18(1), 5-22.

The author reviews the issues impeding the use of SL paraeducators from a speech language pathologist perspective and an administrator perspective. Then addresses each of the issues in ways that support use of paraeducators and development of guidelines to do so. Next the issues / impetus that promote the use of SL paraeducators in education settings are reviewed.

Reissman F. (1984). Paraprofessionals: Twenty years later. Social Policy, 14, 39.

Rogan P., & Held, M. (1999). Paraprofessionals in job coach roles. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 32-42.

This article makes recommendations for recruitment and retention of paraeducators for job coach positions. The authors suggest that programs develop accurate job descriptions, proactively recruit desired personnel, and conduct relevant interviews. Furthermore they recommend that programs invest in retention efforts including ongoing professional development opportunities, increasing pay for experience, credentials, and performance, and providing systems of support. The article also identifies some problems with job coaches in work places and discusses specialist vs. generalist roles.

Rose R. (2000). Using classroom support in the primary school: A single case study. British Journal of Special Education, 27(4), 191-196.

Rueda R. & DeNeve, C. E. (1999). How paraeducators build cultural bridges in diverse classrooms. Community Circle of Caring Journal, 23, 53-55.

Singh P. (2000). Local and official forms of symbolic control: An Australian case study of the pedagogic work of para-educational personnel. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 4(1), 3-21.

Tillery C. Y., Werts, M. G., Roark, R., & Harris, S. (2003). Perceptions of paraeducators on job retention. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26 (2), 118-127.

The authors suggest that factors that are pertinent to teacher retention and attrition may also apply to paraeducators. These include burnout as related to low pay, lack of training, lack of support from parents, stress, student discipline problems, inadequate and insufficient materials, lack of administrative support, lack of influence over school policies and practices, and ambiguity of role definition.

Turner D. J. & Grotzky, M. E. (1995). They teach too: A role for paraprofessionals in library instruction. Reference Librarian, 51-52, 181-193.

The authors describe the use of paraeducators to teach part of the bibliographic instruction sessions offered in the library. They highlight planning, revising the library instruction program because of cutbacks while still trying to meet student needs, staff attitudes, and program evaluation and changes.

U.S. Department of Education (1997). Roles for education paraprofessionals in effective schools: An idea book. Washington, DC: Author.

Ashbaker B.Y., & Morgan, J. (Spring 2004). Legal issues relating to school paraprofessionals. A Legal Memorandum: Quarterly Law Topics for School Leaders (pp. 1-7). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals. (ISSN 0192-6152)

Fluery M. L. (2000). Confidentiality issues with substitutes and paraeducators. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(1), 44-45.

Giangreco M. F. & Broer, S. M. (2005). Questionable utilization of paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20(1), 10-26.

Katsiyannis A., Hodge, J., & Lanford, A. (2000). Paraeducators: legal and practice considerations. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5), 297-304.

This article explains the background of a case involving school health services. IDEA mandates that school health services must be provided by a qualified school nurse or other qualified person, but it does specify that courts ruled that a health aide can perform CIC (clean intermittent catheterization) and trach tube suctioning.

Kennedy J.H. (1995). Teachers, student teachers, paraprofessionals, and young adults' judgments about the acceptable use of corporal punishment in the rural south. Education and Treatment of Children, 18(1), 53-64.

Rubin P. M. & Long, R. M. (1994, Spring). Who is teaching our children: Implications of the use of aides in Chapter 1. ERS Spectrum, 28-34.

Council for Exceptional Children (2004). The CEC paraeducator standards workbook. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Downing J. E., Ryndak, D. L., & Clark, D. (2000). Paraeducators in inclusive classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 21(3), 171-181.

Doyle M.B. (2002). The paraprofessionals guide to the inclusive classroom: Working as a team. (2 nd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

A resource guide for paraeducators working in inclusive classrooms.

Farrell P., Balshaw, M., & Polat, F. (2000). The work of learning support assistants in mainstream schools: Implications for school psychologists. Educational and Child Psychology, 17(2), 66-76.

French N. K. (2003). Paraeducators in special education programs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 36(2), 1-16.

Presents information on the use of paraeducators or paraprofessionals in special education programs. Factors which contribute to the use of paraeducators in special education; Cases which showed the effectiveness of paraeducators; Recommendations on improving paraeducator effectiveness in schools; Web sites which offer information on improving practices and policies regarding paraeducators.

Frith G. H. (1982). The role of the special education paraprofessional: An introductory text. Colombus, OH: Charles C. Thomas.

Giangreco M.F., Halvorsen, A., Doyle, M.B., & Broer, S.M. (2004). Alternatives to overreliance on paraprofessionals in inclusive schools. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 17(2), 82-90.

Hadadian A., & Yssel, N. (1998). Changing roles of paraeducators in early childhood special education. Infant-Toddler Intervention, 8(1), 1-9.

Jones K.H., & Bender, W.N. (1993). Utilization of paraprofessionals in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 7-14.

This article is a literature review that concludes that the efficacy of paraeducator services has only been studied “indirectly” in terms of teacher satisfaction with paraeducators’ performance, rather than in terms measurable in student outcomes in classrooms. The authors suggest four variables could be examined: (1) student; outcomes (2) satisfaction of professionals who work with paraeducators; (3) satisfaction of paraeducators themselves; and (4) improved working conditions of professionals when paraeducators are employed.

Lawlor L., & Cregan, A. (2003). The evolving role of the special needs assistant: Towards a new synergy. REACH Journal of Special Needs Education in Ireland, 16(2), 82-93.

Lindsey J. D. (1983). Paraprofessionals in learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 476-472.

Margerison A. (1997). Class teachers and the role of classroom assistants in the delivery of special educational needs. Support for Learning, 12(4), 166-169.

Marks S., Schrader, C., & Levine, M. (1999). Paraeducator experiences in inclusive settings: Helping, hovering, or holding their own? Exceptional Children, 65, 315-328.

This study used in interviews with paraeducators to reveal intuitive home-grown attitudes about their roles, in the absence of role specification. Paraeducators believe it is their job to keep students with disabilities from bothering regular education teachers. They further believe that they are responsible for all aspects of a child’s education, that they have to create all modifications and adaptations for the child, and that they are responsible totally for the child.

Minondo S., Meyer, L.H., & Xin, J.F. (2001). The role and responsibilities of teaching assistants in inclusive education: What's appropriate. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 114-119.

National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities . (1999). Learning disabilities: Use of paraprofessionals. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 22(1), 23-30.

Riggs C. G., & Mueller, P. H. (2001). Employment and utilization of paraeducators in inclusive settings. The Journal of Special Education, 35(1), 54-62.

Wadsworth D. E., Knight, D. (1996). Paraprofessionals: The bridge to successful full inclusion. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31(3), 166-171.

Werts M. G., Wolery, M., Snyder, E., & Caldwell, N. (1996). Teachers' perceptions of the supports critical to the success of inclusion programs. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 21(1), 9-21.

Wolery M., Martin, C.G., Schroeder, C., Huffman, K., Venn, M.L., Holcombe, A., Brookfield, J., & Fleming, L. (1994). Employment of educators in preschool mainstreaming: A survey of general early educators. Journal of Early Intervention, 18(1), 64-77.

Chopra R. V., & French, N. K. (2004). Paraeducator relationships with parents of students with significant disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 240-251.

This study examined the relationships between parents of students with significant disabilities and paraeducators who supported the students in inclusive educational settings. Results revealed five types of relationships between parents and paraeducators: close and personal friendship, routine limited interactions, routine extended interactions, tense relationship, and minimal relationship. Results indicated that it is important for paraeducators and parents to communicate because paraeducators spend more time with the students and gain insight into their academic and social behaviors. However, for paraeducator--parent relationships to be beneficial in the students' education, they must remain within the limits and boundaries established by the teacher.

Doyle M. B. (1998). My child has a new shadow and it doesn’t resemble her! Disability Solutions, 3(1), 5-9.

This article is addressed to parents. The author suggests they ask why the teacher plans programs for children with without disabilities, but the paraeducator has the sole responsibility for the program of their child with a disability.

French N.K., & Chopra, R. (1999). Parent perspectives on the roles of paraprofessionals. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(4), 259-272.

Parents of children with severe handicaps receiving special education services in general classrooms were interviewed in focus groups about their perceptions of paraprofessionals who worked with their children. Mother’s had close bonds with paraprofessionals and identified with them. They believed that they were extremely dedicated people who worked with their children in caring and compassionate ways. Four roles emerged that the parents viewed the paraprofessionals fulfilling for their children. Those were a team member with the other educational professionals who served their children, a connector between home and school, a teacher, and a health care provider. Parents were also aware of issues/problems of paraeducators that have been identified on other literature. Specifically those were low pay, inadequate training, lack of respect, and high turnover. Interestingly, the issue of most concern was that of respect. Parents believed that lack of respect shown paraeducators reflected a lack of respect for their children.

Haas E.M. (1996). Necessity: The mother of intervention. A parent's recommendation for the preparation and use of speech-language paraprofessionals in education settings. Journal of Children's Communication Development, 18(1), 111-114.

Mueller P.H. (2002). The paraeducator paradox. Exceptional Parent, 32(9), 64-67.

Werts M.G., Harris, S., Tillery, C.Y., Roark, R. (2004). What parents tell us about paraeducators. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 232-239.

This study examined parent perceptions of the paraeducators’ role. Overall parents were pleased with the paraeducators’ work and role and even viewed them as teachers. Their recommendations for improvement included providing the paraeducators with more training, improving communication between home and school, valuing their professional contributions by including them in IEP meetings and parent-teacher conferences.

Boomer L. W. (1994). The utilization of paraprofessionals in programs for students with autism. Focus On Autistic Behavior, 9(2), 1-9.

This article refers to the changing roles of paraeducators – from that of ‘teacher helper’ to instructional assistant. It also speaks to 3 myths about programs for students with autism. (1) That students with autism require 1:1 assistance; (2) that paraeducators should be able to work independently; (3) that paraeducators will make the special education teacher’s job easier.

Broer S. M., Doyle, M. B., & Giangreco, M. F. (2005) Perspectives of students with intellectual disabilities about their experiences with paraprofessional support. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 415-430.

This article report on a research study that interviewed young adults about their perception of the paraeducator support they had received while in high school. The study found that paraeducators were viewed both positively and negatively in four roles: (1) mother; (2) friend; (3) protector from bullying; and (4) primary teacher. The authors state that each role is a cause for concern and they provide recommendations for schools to minimize these effects increasing teacher involvement, listening to students with disabilities and including them more in decisions about their support needs.

Carter, E. W., Cushing, L. S., Clark, N. M., & Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Effects of peer support interventions on students’ access to the general curriculum and social interactions. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30(1), 15-25.

Causton-Theoharis J.N., & Malmgren, K.W. (2005). Building bridges: Strategies to help paraprofessionals promote peer interactions. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(6), 18-24.

This article provides strategies for paraeducators to use to increase peer interactions between children with disabilities and other children in general classrooms. It describes social problems that children with disabilities face when they are supported by a one-on-one paraeducator and provides strategies paraeducators can use to minimize these problems and promote peer interaction.

Cushing L. S., Clark, N., Carter, E. W., & Kennedy, C. H. (2003). Peer supports and access to the general education curriculum. TASH Connections, 29(10), 8-11.

Ernsperger L.A. (1998, Summer). Using a paraeducator to facilitate school reentry. Reaching Today’s Youth: Community Circle of Caring Journal, 2(4), 9-12.

Erwin E. (1996). Meaningful participation in early childhood general education: Exploring the use of natural supports and adaptive strategies. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 90, 400-411.

French N. K. & Lock, R.H., (2002). Maximize paraprofessional services for students with learning disabilities. Interventions in Schools and Clinic, 38(1), 50-55.

This article presents several ways to maximize paraprofessional services for student with learning disabilities. It provides information on how to determine of program and student needs, assess the kills of the teaching assistant, and document the performance of duties.

Gerber S.B., Finn, J.D., Achilles, C.M., Boyd-Zaharias, J. (2001). Teacher aides and students' academic achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 123-143.

This article is based on a reanalysis of the Tennessee STAR report with regard to its findings on aides. It states that aides have no effect on students test scores and that students benefit academically if aides perform only clerical tasks. They do concede that it is also possible that teacher aides may provide important attention and support to specific students. This may be reflected in those students’ test scores, but not affect the class as a whole. It provides recommendations for courses of action and future research.

Giangreco M. F., Edelman, S. W., Broer, S. M., & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities: Literature from the past decade. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 45-63.

This article is a literature review that summarizes the research on paraeducators in special education that was completed in that last decade of the 20th century.

Giangreco M.F., Broer, S.M., & Edelman, S.W. (2002). "That was then, this is now!" Paraprofessional supports for students with disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptionality, 10(1), 47-64.

Giangreco M.F., Broer, S.M., & Edelman, S.W. (2001). Teacher engagement with students with disabilities: Differences based on paraprofessional service delivery models. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 75-86.

Giangreco M. F., Broer S. M., & Edelman, S. W. (1999). The tip of the iceberg: Determining whether paraprofessional support is needed for students with disabilities in general education settings. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(4), 280-290.

The authors state that a well trained paraeducator does many things that foster inclusion, but deciding when paraeducators are necessary is challenging. They encourage consideration of alternative support solutions that may not involve the use of paraprofessionals.

Giangreco M.F., Cichoski-Kelly, E., Backus, L., Edelman, S., Broer, S., CichoskiKelly, C., & Spinney, P. (1999, March). Developing a shared understanding: Paraeducator supports for students with disabilities in general education. TASH Newsletter, 25(1), 21-23.

Giangreco M.F. & Doyle, M.B. (2002). Students with disabilities and paraprofessional supports: Benefits, balance, and band-aids. Focus on Exceptional Children, 34 (7), 1-12.

Giangreco M.F., Edelman, S.W., & Broer, S.M. (2001). Respect, appreciation, and acknowledgement of paraprofessionals who support students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67, 485-498.

Giangreco M.F., Edelman, S., Luiselli, T.E., & MacFarland, S.Z.C. (1997). Helping or hovering? Effects of instructional assistant proximity on students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 64, 7-18.

This article presents a case against the use of paraeducators because they foster dependence of students. The authors also state that paraeducators create barriers between students with and without disabilities, between regular education teachers and students with disabilities.

Giangreco M.F., Yuan, S., McKenzie, B., Cameron, P., & Fialka, J. (2005). "Be careful what you wish for…” Five reasons to be concerned about the assignment of individual paraprofessionals. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(5), 28-34.

Hall L.J., & Macvean, M.L. (1997). Increases in the communicative behaviors of students with cerebral palsy as a result of feedback to, and the selection of goals by, paraprofessionals. Behaviour Change, 14(3), 174-184.

Hemmingsson H., Borell, L., & Gustavsson, A. (2003). Participation in school: School assistants creating opportunities and obstacles for pupils with disabilities. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 23(3), 88-98.

Hill C. (2003) The role of instructional assistants in regular classrooms: Are they influencing inclusive practices? Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 49(1), 98-100.

This is a report of a research study in which the researcher observed ten regular elementary classrooms in seven Winnipeg elementary schools. She selected classes where instructional assistants were assigned to students with severe disabilities for a minimum of 2.5 hours per day. Data was collected at one minute intervals. Activities included were those in which the instructional assistant was involved, and participated in the interaction. Also noted was whether the interaction occurred in or out of the classroom. Observations ranged from 2-2.5 hrs per classroom for a total of 23.5 hours of observation. Results were that assistants interacted most often with regular and special education students together, rather than with special education students alone.

Jenkins J.R., Vadasy, P.F., Firebaugh, M., & Profilet, C. (2000). Tutoring first-grade struggling readers in phonological reading skills. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 75-84.

Kotkin R. A. (1995). The Irvine paraprofessional program: Using paraprofessionals in serving students with ADHD. Intervention in School and Clinic, 30(4), 235-240.

The purpose of article is to provide description of Irvine Paraprofessional Program (IPP) which consists of 1) providing classroom interventions to ADHD students via specially trained paraeducators, 2) consultation to the teacher by the school psychologist, 3) school-based reinforcement, and 4) social skills training. They found that students receiving the combined set of practices (ST + classroom aide) improved over the course of the years, whereas less than half of the students in the control group or the ST only group improved (in terms of disruptive behavior in class).

Lacey P. (2001). The role of learning support assistants in the inclusive learning of pupils with severe and profound learning difficulties. Educational Review, 53(2), 157-167.

Martella R.C., Marchand-Martella, N.E., Miller, T.L., Young, K.R., & Macfarlane, C.A. (1995). Teaching instructional aides and peer tutors to decrease problem behaviors in the classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 27(2), 53-56.

McDonnell J., Johnson, J. W., Polychronis, S., & Risen, T. (2002). Effects of embedded instruction on students with moderate disabilities enrolled in general education classes. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(4), 363-377.

Miller S. D. (2003). Partners-in-reading: Using classroom assistants to provide tutorial assistance to struggling first-grade readers. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8 (3), 333-349.

Mueller P.H., & Murphy, F.V. (2001). Determining when a student requires paraeducator support. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33 (6), 22-27.

Robertson K., Chamberlain, B., Kasari, C. (2003). General education teachers' relationship with included students with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33(2), 123-130.

Shukla S., Kennedy, C.H., & Cushing, L.S. (1999). Intermediate school students with severe disabilities: Supporting their education in general education classrooms. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(3), 130-140.

Skar L., & Tamm, M. (2001). My assistant and I: Disabled children's and adolescents' roles and relationships to their assistants. Disability and Society, 16, 917-931.

Vadasy P.F., Sanders, E.A., Jenkins, J.R., & Peyton, J.A. (2002). Timing and intensity of tutoring: A closer look at the conditions for effective early literacy tutoring. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 17(4), 227-241.

Vadasy, P.F., Jenkins, J.R., & Poole, K. (2000). Effects of tutoring in phonological and early reading skills on students at risk for reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 579-590.

Vadasy, P.F., Jenkins, J.R., Antil, L. R., Wayne, S.K., & O'Connor, R. E. (1997). The effectiveness of one-to-one tutoring by community tutors for at-risk beginning readers. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 20, 126-139.

Vadasy, P.F., Jenkins, J.R., Antil, L. R., Wayne, S.K., & O'Connor, R. E. (1997). Community-based early reading intervention for at-risk first graders. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 12, 29-39.

Watkins S., Clark, T., Strong, C., & Barringer, D. (1994). The effectiveness of an intervener model of services for young deaf-blind children. American Annals of the Deaf, 139 (4), 404-409.

Welch M., Richards, G., Okada, T., Richards, J., & Prescott, S. (1995). A consultation and paraprofessional pull-in system of service delivery: A report on student outcomes and teacher satisfaction. Remedial and Special Education, 16(1), 16-28.

Werts M.G., Zigmond, N., & Leeper, D.C. (2001) Paraprofessional proximity and academic engagement: Students with disabilities in primary aged classrooms. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36(4). 424-440.

Young B., Simpson, R., Smith Myles, B., and Kamps, D.M. (1997). An examination of paraprofessional involvement in supporting students with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12(1), 31-38, 48.

This study investigated paraeducator proximity to students with autism in general education classrooms. They found that the teacher initiated contact with student most when paraeducator was more than 2 ft. away from students or when out of the room, but initiated contact with student less than 1% of the time when paraeducator was closer than 2 ft. away. However, paraeducators initiated no interactions with student 75% of the observed time. In fact, 82% of the time no one initiated contact. The use of gestures or cueing was observed less than 1% of the time – a problem because all students had difficulty with verbal directions and needed cues and prompts. In spite of this, students were on task appropriate amounts of time – most often when working with a peer. Their conclusion was that maybe the most appropriate role of the paraeducator with children with autism is to facilitate peer interaction.

Drecktrah M.E. (2000, Spring). Preservice teachers' preparation to work with paraeducators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 12(2), 157-164.

This is a report if a research study that surveyed 300 special education teachers in Wisconsin. 67% indicated they have supervisory responsibilities and 38% evaluate.

14% indicated they had preparation to “collaborate” with paraprofessionals in their teacher education programs. 10% had preparation to “supervise” paraeducators. 7% had preparation on how to “evaluate” paraeducators. 4% reported that they had a specific pre-service course on paraeducators. 88% indicated they had no prior preparation to supervise paraeducators. The majority received no further training from their districts in supervision.

French N.K. (1996). A case study of a speech-language pathologist's supervision of assistants in a school setting: Tracy's story. Journal of Children's Communication Development, 18(1), 103-110.

This article is an account of one speech-language pathologists experience with supervising SLP assistants in a school setting. She recounts her challenges and successes with supervision.

French N. K. (1998). Working together: Resource teachers and paraeducators. Remedial and Special Education, 19, 357-368.

This article presents the results of a study that explored the relationship between teachers and paraeducators assigned to resource programs in the United States.

French N. K. (2000). Topic #3: Taking time to save time: Delegating to paraeducators. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(3), 79-83.

This is the third of a three part series. This part focuses on practical ways to make decisions about which classroom tasks to delegate to paraeducators. It provides correlation between effective delegation and effective team management. It also provides six steps to delegation.

French N. K. (2001). Supervising paraprofessionals: A survey of teacher practices. Journal of Special Education 35, 41-53.

This is a report on a research study that examined the practices of special education teachers in the supervision of paraprofessionals in Colorado. The study found a lack of pre-service and in-service preparation of teachers for supervision of paraeducators. Many teachers did not plan and only provided oral instructions to paraprofessionals. It highlights the necessity of supervisory training in special education programs.

French N. K. (2003). Managing paraeducators in your school: How to hire, train, and supervise non-certified staff. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, Inc.

This book is a detailed resource guide for paraeducators and administrators on how to supervise paraeducators. It also includes information on hiring and training.

French, N. K. & Chopra, R. V. (2006). Teachers as Executives. Theory into Practice, 45(3), 230-238.

The roles and responsibilities of special educator shave shifted as schools move to provide inclusive services for students with disabilities. The inclusive special educator is responsible for coordinating a complex system of adults and students—often including paraeducators, related service specialists, classroom teachers, and peer assistants. This contemporary role is analogous to that of an executive in business settings and requires comparable leadership, collaboration, and communication skills. Teachers who demonstrate skills in 5 key functioning areas may see more successful inclusion of their students. Of importance, teachers who are adjusting to the shift in role require certain administrative supports as they acquire this new identity of executive.

French N. K., & Pickett, A.L. (1997). Paraprofessionals in special education: Issues for teacher educators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 20(1), 61-73.

Freschi D.F. (1999). Guidelines for working with one-to-one aides. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(4), 42-47.

The author defines one-to-one support and then lists risks of one-to-one support. Also provided are guidelines for the philosophical foundations of a one-to-one support program and steps for planning in this type of program.

Gerlach K. (2001). Let's team up: A checklist for paraeducators, teachers, and principals. Washington, DC: National Education Association of the United States.

Ghere G., & York-Barr, J. (2003). Employing, developing, and directing special education paraprofessionals in inclusive education programs: Findings from a multi-site case study. Minneapolis, MN: Institute on Community Integration (UCEDD) & Department of Educational Policy and Administration, University of Minnesota.

Giangreco M. F. (2003). Working with paraprofessionals. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 50-53.

Giangreco M.F., Broer, S.M., & Edelman, S.W. (2002). Schoolwide planning to improve paraeducator supports: A pilot study. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 21(1), 3-15.

This article is a report of a program evaluation data from 46 paraeducator-teacher teams in 13 states who used a 10 step planning process for paraeducator supports of students with disabilities. The findings showed that the process helped in assessing their own practices, identifying priorities, and developing actions, implementing and evaluating action plans. They also reported perceived effects on adults and students. The least addressed issues had to do with funding. The findings also showed that the process contributed to perceptions of adult outcomes and perceptions of better student outcomes.

Jerwood L. (1999). Using special needs assistants effectively. British Journal of Special Education, 26(3), 127-129.

Killoran J., Templeman, T. P., Peters, J., & Udell, T. (2001) Identifying paraprofessional competencies for early intervention and early childhood special education.  Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(1), 68-73.

Morgan J., & Ashbaker, B.Y. (2001). A teacher's guide to working with paraeducators and other classroom aides. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Pickett A. L. (1999). Strengthening and supporting teacher/provider-paraeducator teams: Guidelines for paraeducator roles, supervision, and preparation. New York, New York: City University of New York, National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals in Education and Related Services.

Pickett A.L., & Gerlach, K. (1997). Supervising paraeducators in school settings: A team approach. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

This book is a compilation of chapters form multiple contributors that is a resource guide that will help professional educators work effectively with paraeducators in teams. It covers all aspects of paraeducator employment, roles, and supervision.

Railsback J., Reed, B., & Schmidt, K. (2002). Working together for successful paraeducator services: A guide for paraeducators, teachers, and principals. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Portland, OR.

Riggs C. G. (May/June 2004). To teachers: What paraeducators want you to know. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(5), 8-12.

Riggs C. G. (2002). Providing administrative support for classroom paraeducators: What’s a building administrator to do? Rural Special Education Quarterly 21 (3), 10-14.

Salzberg C.L., & Morgan, J. (1995). Preparing teachers to work with paraeducators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 18, 49-55.

The authors cite five reasons for increased interest in paraprofessionals. They note that the growing use of paraeducators raises different problems for teachers. They also review commonalities in training programs / recommendations

Wallace T., Shin, J., Bartholomay, T., Stahl, B. (2001). Knowledge and skills for teachers supervising the work of paraprofessionals. Exceptional Children, 67, 520-533.

This research was a mixed methods study that used surveys and focus groups that identified competencies for teachers who work with paraeducators. They are: (1) Communicating with paraeducators; (2) Planning and scheduling; (3) Instructional support; (4) Modeling for paraeducators; (5) Public relations; (6) Training; and (7)

Management of paraeducators. The latter included roles & responsibilities, supportive interaction, contributing to the evaluation of paraeducator performance with intent to improve skills.

Balshaw M., & Farrell, P. (2002). Teacher assistants: Practical strategies for effective classroom support. London: David Fulton.

Blalock G., Rivera, D., Anderson, K., & Kottler, B. (1992). A school district/university partnership in paraprofessional training. LD Forum, 17(3), 29-36.

The authors describe a school district / university partnership to provide paraeducator training that addresses district needs.

Bugaj S.J. (2002). Improving the skills of special education paraprofessionals: A rural school district’s model for staff development. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 21(1), 16-24.

Carroll D. (2001, November/December). Considering paraeducator training, roles, and responsibilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(2), 60-64.

Causton-Theoharis J. N. & Malmgren, K. W. (2005). Increasing peer interactions for students with severe disabilities via paraprofessional training. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 431-444.

This research studied the effect of a four hour paraeducator training session designed to teach them to facilitate interactions between children with disabilities and other children in the general classroom. Baseline data was first collected on four paraeducator-student teams through observations. After the training, more observations took place. The results indicated that rates of paraeducator facilitation increased after the training and that rates of student interaction with peers increased dramatically. In other words, one paraeducator facilitative action could result in multiple student interactions with peers.

Coufal K.L., Steckelberg, A.L., & Vasa, S.F. (1991). Current trends in the training and utilization of paraprofessional in speech and language programs: A report on an eleven-state survey. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 22, 51-59.

The authors asked current programs about training. While many claim to provide continuing education and on the job training, few maintain any documentation of training provided. Although they reported that they frequently covered a list of training topics, they rated the importance of each topic higher than they claimed that they actually provided training on the topic.

Cremin H., Thomas, G., & Vincett, K. (2003). Learning zones: An evaluation of three models for improving learning through teacher/teaching assistant teamwork. Support for Learning, 18(4), 154-164.

Elrod G. F., Insko, L., & Williams, L. (1993). A descriptive study of instructional assistants in rural and remote eastern Oregon: Implications for professional development. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 12 (4), 22-30.

Feehan P. F. & Wade, S. L. (1998). The paraprofessional alternative. Journal of Career Development, 25(2), 149-157.

This article provides a program description of 20-year old program at the Career Center of the University of Missouri-Columbia where paraprofessionals are trained to provide career counseling.

French N.K., & Cabell, E.A. (1993). Are community college programs for paraeducators feasible? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 17(2), 131-140.

This article reflects a survey of special education directors, personnel directors and teachers in Colorado regarding their interest in community college training programs for paraeducators. Respondents were grouped by category and urban and rural locations. There was great interest in training programs for paraeducators but opinions of what should be taught varied for urban and rural districts. Urban districts wanted more specialized training and rural districts wanted more general training. This reflected the differences in job responsibilities for paras in urban and rural districts. There was almost total rejection of the idea of training paraeducators before hiring and of having state mandated educational requirements for paraeducators. Most highly supported community college training programs but wanted the training to occur after hiring and in district. The results point to a need to flexible training in a modular format. A 15-18 hour training program was considered adequate. The respondents indicated that an associate’s degree was not necessary. The results are interesting when considering the fact that ten years later federal legislation was implemented that mandated all the things the respondents in this survey rejected including: training prior to hiring and an associates degree or two years of college.

Ghere G., York-Barr, J., & Sommerness, J. (2002). Supporting students with disabilities in inclusive schools: A curriculum for job-embedded paraprofessional development. Minneapolis: Institute on Community Education ( University of Minnesota).

Giangreco M.F., Backus, L., CichoskiKelly, E., Sherman, P., & Mavropoulos, Y. (2003). Paraeducator training materials to facilitate inclusive education: Initial field-test data. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 22(1), 17-27.

Giangreco M.F., & Broer, S.M. (March/April 2003). The paraprofessional conundrum: Why we need alternative support strategies. TASH Connections Newsletter, 29 (3/4), 22-23.

Glang A., Gersten, R., Singer, G. (1990). Computer-assisted video instruction in training paraprofessionals to teach brain-damaged clients. Journal of Special Education Technology, 10(3), 137-46.

Hall L. J., McClannahan, L. E., & Krantz, P. J. (1995). Promoting independence in integrated classrooms by teaching aides to use activity schedules and decreased prompts. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30, 208-217.

Hammeken P.A. (1996). Inclusion: An essential guide for the paraprofessional. Minnetonka, MN: Peytral Publications.

Hansen D. (1997). Use of focus-group needs assessment for planning paraprofessional staff development in Iowa's education settings. Journal of Children's Communication Development, 18(1), 81-90.

The authors reports that there is not consistency across the state of Iowa in the types of training offered for paraeducators. There is not much beyond on-the-job coaching and allowing paraeducators to attend teacher in-service training.

Harper V. (1994). Multicultural perspectives in the classroom: Professional preparation for educational paraprofessionals. Action in Teacher Education, XVI (3), 66-78.

Hilton A., & Gerlach, K. (1997). Employment, preparation and management of paraeducators: Challenges to appropriate services for students with developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 32, 71-77.

This article calls for research on every aspect of paraeducator employment.

Lasater M. W., Johnson, M. M., & Fitzgerald, M. (2000). Completing the education mosaic: Paraeducator professional development options. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(1), 46-51.

Martella R.C., Marchand-Martella, N.E., Macfarlane, C.A., & Young, K.R. (1993). Improving classroom behavior of a student with severe disabilities via paraprofessional training. British Columbia Journal of Special Education, 17, 33-44.

Morehouse J.A., & Albright, L. (1991). The training trends and needs of paraprofessionals in transition service delivery agencies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 14(4), 248-256.

This article reviews five categories of training needs for paraeducators in transition programs. Included are: assessment of program and learner needs, planning programs or instruction, implementation of instruction, job site training and instruction, and evaluation of student progress.

Morgan J., Ashbaker, B.Y., & Allred, D. (2000). Providing training for paraeducators: What motivates them to attend? The Researcher: A Publication of the Northern Rocky Mountain Educational Research Association 15(1), 50-55.

Morgan J., & Hofmeister, A.M. (1997). Staff development curricula for the paraeducator: Observations from the research. CASE in Point 10(2), 37-41.

Mueller P.H. (2003). Building capacity to attract, train, support and retain paraeducators. Williston, VT: Northeast Regional Resource Center.

Passaro P. D., Pickett, A. L., Latham, G., HongBo, W. (1994). The training and support needs of paraprofessionals in rural special education. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 13(4), 3-9.

Two surveys were completed in three sparsely populated western states four groups: paraeducators in special education and related services, special education teachers, related services personnel, and administrators. 445 paraeducator and 565 professional surveys were distributed. The return rate was 52% for paraeducators and 46% for teachers/administrators. 75% of paraeducators worked in instructional settings, some included interpreters, job coachers, and some preschool programs. 62% of professional respondents were teachers, 16 % directors of special education, 11% administrators, 5% related services professionals. For the paraeducators, 96% were female with their average age being 43. Their average education level is 13.5 years and mean years of service equaled 6.1 yrs.

Parsons M.B., & Reid, D.H. (1999). Training basic teaching skills to paraeducators of students with severe disabilities: A one-day program. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(4), 48-55.

The authors use the phrase “pyramid model” to describe a training of trainers model They state that effective staff training as should have a focus on performance based skills, should be conducted efficiently, should result in mastery of the skills taught by the program, should result in student learning, and must be acceptable to staff. For example, they must like the process and see the material as relevant and realistic.

P. L. 107-110, 107th Cong. (2001) (enacted) No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved from: http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02/

Outlines the requirements for paraeducators contained in the NCLB legislation. Consult your state department of education for specific interpretations of the law as required by your state.

Potter C.A. & Richardson, H.R. (1999). Facilitating classroom assistants' professional reflection through video workshops. British Journal of Special Education 26 (1), 34-36.

Rea P. (January 2001). Paraprofessionals: Training for success. Quinlan's Special Education Law Bulletin, 7(1), 1-2.

Reinoehl R. B., & Halle, J. W. (1994). Increasing the assessment probe performance of teacher aides through written prompts. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24, 272-279.

This article describes a research study that found that paraeducators did not use probe procedures taught them during training in baseline observations, but increased their use of probes when given written prompts every day.

Riggs C.G. (2001, January/February). Ask the paraprofessionals: What are your training needs? Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(3), 78-83.

The researcher collected training needs information in three ways. First was a survey of 200 paraeducators from one of Connecticut’s largest districts. The second source of data was responses on conference evaluations asking for “top 3 priorities for topics that you would like to see presented in training activities.” The third source of data was interviews conducted with twenty paraeducators in several different districts. Most of the findings are consistent with other surveys, except for “roles and responsibilities” which didn’t really show up strongly in this study.

Russotti J. & Rona S. (2001). In-service training for teacher assistants and others who work with students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 95 (8), 483-487.

Storey K., Smith, D. J., & Strain, P. S. (1993). Use of classroom assistants and peer-mediated intervention to increase integration in preschool settings. Exceptionality, 4, 1-16.

This study examined effectiveness of peer-mediated intervention on the social behavior of withdrawn preschoolers. Intervention took place in public school classrooms and was conducted by classroom assistants. Results demonstrate that each of the withdrawn preschoolers increased their social interactions with peers during instructional triads. Social validation findings also indicated improvement in the students’ behavior.

Steckelberg A.L., & Vasa, S.F. (1998). How paraeducators learn on the web. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30(5), 54-59.