Bridget A. Cotner

Teacher Preparation Programs

The landscape of teacher preparation must address the enormous pressures that face today’s teachers. In the United States currently, teachers are under intense scrutiny while addressing the changing needs of students who are both increasingly diverse and polarized with respect to their socioeconomic status. Moreover, teachers face stringent requirements for accountability under the rubric of No Child Left Behind (US Department of Education, 2007). Furthermore, teacher preparation leader Darling-Hammond suggests the call for a national policy to facilitate schools in addressing the intellectual needs of the twenty-first century (Darling-Hammond, 2007). Students need access to quality education and teachers to prepare them for their futures. Research indicates that a knowledgeable teacher is better equipped to facilitate student learning then teachers who have not been academically prepared (Olson, 2000). To address these complexities, colleges of education are attempting to adapt their traditional models of teacher education. In addition, new alternative routes to certification of teachers are being implemented throughout the nation (Bradley, 2007). These reform efforts have had varying degrees of success. Teachers’ formidable task is to prepare youth to take their places in a global society that continues to change dramatically. No one can accurately predict what US society will look like in coming decades; however, children in US schools today will be expected to take their places, accept leadership roles, populate the workforce, solve world problems and pass a useful legacy to coming generations of youth. According to a recent survey as many as two-thirds of Americans believe that if we fail to make appropriate reforms with the US education system, our ability to remain globally competitive will be compromised within the next decade. This is particularly true in the area of mathematics and science if the United States wants to maintain an edge in the global economy and be competitive with nations such as China, India and Japan. High school graduates must be better prepared for college and technical jobs in this ever changing modern economy (Peter D. Hart Research Associates Inc. and Winston Group, 2006). All this will happen in a complex, interconnected technological world that we can only imagine but for which we must assist in guiding the preparation

Provider-identified barriers and facilitators to implementing a supported employment program in spinal cord injury

Abstract Purpose: In a 5-year study, individual placement and support (IPS) significantly increased employment rate of United States Veterans with spinal cord injury (SCI), a historically underemployed population. In a follow-up study, data on barriers and facilitators to IPS implementation were identified. Methods: Over 24 months of implementation, 82 key medical and vocational staff underwent semi-structured interviews (n = 130). Interviews were digitally recorded and qualitatively analyzed (ATLAS.ti v0.7) using a constant comparative method to generate themes. Results: Some barriers to implementation occurred throughout the study, such as Veterans’ lack of motivation and providers’ difficulty integrating vocational and medical rehabilitation. Other barriers emerged at specific stages, for example, early barriers included a large geographic service area and a large patient caseload, and late barriers included need for staff education. Facilitators were mostly constant throughout implementation and included leadership support and successful integration of vocational staff into the medical care team. Conclusions: Implementation strategies need to be adjusted as implementation progresses and matures. The strategies that succeeded in this setting, which were situated in a real-world context of providing IPS as a part of SCI medical care, may inform implementation of IPS for other populations with physical disabilities. Implications for Rehabilitation Key facilitators to IPS in SCI implementation are integrating vocational staff with expertise in IPS and SCI on clinical rehabilitation teams and providing leadership support. Ongoing barriers to IPS in SCI include patient specific and program administration factors such as caseload size and staffing patterns. Varying implementation strategies are needed to address barriers as they arise and facilitate successful implementation.

Scoping review of resources for integrating evidence-based supported employment into spinal cord injury rehabilitation

Abstract Purpose: Individual placement and support (IPS), an evidence-based supported employment (SE) program, has helped Veterans with spinal cord injury (SCI) receiving care in the Veterans Health Administration to obtain work. To facilitate integration of IPS into SCI rehabilitation, resources are needed. A scoping review was conducted to identify tools and resources suitable for providers of SCI care. Methods: Applying a modified version of Arksey and O’Malley’s framework, a scoping review of literature on SE tools or resources was conducted. The original review focused on resources published between 2002 and 2015 and available in English. Prior to publication an updated review through 2017 was conducted. Results: From 1822 tools and resources identified in the initial review, 24 met criteria for inclusion and were evaluated by an advisory panel of experts, who selected 16 tools that addressed five topics: IPS in SCI (n = 2) orientation to SCI (n = 3); IPS SE (n = 7), job accommodations (n = 2), and benefits planning (n = 2). The updated review yielded no tools or resources that met inclusion criteria. Conclusion: Despite few resources to guide implementation of IPS in SCI, 16 essential resources were identified that, combined into a toolkit, may facilitate translation of IPS in SCI from research to clinical care. Implications for rehabilitation The toolkit consists of 16 essential resources and is currently available online to all persons involved in spinal cord injury rehabilitation to educate them about this effective means of assisting persons with spinal cord injury to find employment and to facilitate translation of individual placement and support in spinal cord injury from research to clinical care. While expert-informed, the toolkit is being field tested with both clinical and vocational providers to facilitate the adoption of individual placement and support by spinal cord injury rehabilitation programs. The revised version will be made available online.

Quality of Life Outcomes for Veterans With Spinal Cord Injury Receiving Individual Placement and Support (IPS)

Background: Individual Placement and Support (IPS) is an evidence-based practice that helps persons with mental and/or physical disabilities, including spinal cord injury, find meaningful employment in the community. While employment is associated with positive rehabilitation outcomes, more research is needed on the impact of IPS participation on non-vocational outcomes, particularly quality of life (QOL). Objective: To identity QOL outcomes experienced with (1) IPS participation and (2) IPS participation leading to employment. Methods: Using a mixed method design, data on quality of life outcomes were collected from 151 interviews and 213 surveys completed by veterans with SCI participating in IPS. Results: At 12 months, participants who obtained competitive employment (CE) and those who did not (no-CE) showed improvement on most measures. In months 12-24, the CE group showed improvements on all study measures while the no-CE group declined on many indices. Statistically significant changes were observed between participants who obtained CE versus no-CE on several measures. Themes were identified from interview data related to productivity and well-being. Productivity themes were (1) contributing to society, (2) earning an income, and (3) maintaining employment. Themes for well-being were (1) mental health/self-confidence, (2) physical health, and (3) goal setting. Themes were associated with IPS participation irrespective of employment outcomes. Conclusion: IPS participants who were competitively employed report consistent improvement in handicap, health-related QOL, and life satisfaction measures across time. Qualitative findings revealed improved QOL outcomes in productivity and well-being for veterans participating in IPS overall, regardless of employment outcomes.

Employment Stability in the First 5 Years After Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

OBJECTIVE To characterize employment stability and identify predictive factors of employment stability in working-age individuals after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) that may be clinically addressed. DESIGN Longitudinal observational study of an inception cohort from the Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems National Database (TBIMS-NDB) using data at years 1, 2, and 5 post-TBI. SETTING Inpatient rehabilitation centers with telephone follow-up. PARTICIPANTS Individuals enrolled in the TBIMS-NDB since 2001, aged 18-59, with employment data at 2 or more follow-up interviews at years 1, 2, and 5 (N=5683). INTERVENTIONS Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Employment stability, categorized using post-TBI employment data as no paid employment (53.25%), stably (27.20%), delayed (10.24%), or unstably (9.31%) employed. RESULTS Multinomial regression analyses identified predictive factors of employment stability, including younger age, white race, less severe injuries, preinjury employment, higher annual earnings, male sex, higher education, transportation independence postinjury, and no anxiety or depression at 1 year post-TBI. CONCLUSIONS Employment stability serves as an important measure of productivity post-TBI. Psychosocial, clinical, environmental, and demographic factors predict employment stability post-TBI. Notable predictors include transportation independence as well as the presence of anxiety and depression at year 1 post-TBI as potentially modifiable intervention targets.

Bringing School Reform to Scale: Five Award-Winning Urban Districts by Heather Zavadsky

In Bringing School Reform to Scale: Five Award-Winning Urban Districts, Heather Zavadsky presents five urban school districts to “provide a unique opportunity to learn about five exemplary urban public school districts that have demonstrated higher performance and/or greater improvement than similar districts in their states” (2010, xix). The book specifically targets urban school district personnel and policymakers. However, any school stakeholder who longs for educational improvement would benefit. Zavadsky uses The Broad Prize for Urban Education, a prestigious

Case Study Methods

2 million dollar award funded by The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation and awarded annually to an urban school district in recognition of systemwide student gains, as the mechanism to select the most successful school districts in the United States. Five urban school districts are presented: (a) Aldine Independent School District (north of Houston, Texas), (b) Boston Public Schools, (c) Garden Grove Unified School District (Los Angeles, California, area), (d) Long Beach Unified School District (Long Beach, California), and (e) Norfolk Public Schools (Norfolk, Virginia). Zavadsky makes use of The Broad Prize data (math and reading proficiencies K–12; racial and income gap analyses; three different graduation analyses; college-readiness measures including SAT and ACT scores and AP exam success; interviews and observations) collected from 2002 to 2006 and applied the National Center for Educational Achievement’s Best Practice Framework (“the Framework”). The author draws on her experience as a former Austin-based project director of The Broad Prize from 2003 to 2006. Through her firsthand experiences and insider knowledge of the data and Framework, Zavadsky is able to make a case that any school district can achieve the level of success obtained by the five exemplary examples in this book through systemic reform that aligns two main areas: (a) alignment of the school system’s district central office administrators, school leadership, and classroom teachers; and (b) alignment of the school system’s practices across schools and throughout all grades. The end result, according to Zavadsky (2010, p. 5), “is a large-scale change in teaching and learning that produces a seamless educational program for students, regardless of their location within the district.” Zavadsky fulfills her purpose of demonstrating how to promote system-wide changes