Characteristics that influence high school special education teachers' choice of curriculum in their classrooms

The purpose of this study was to examine and to describe the factors that influenced high school special education teachers' choice of curriculum in their classrooms. Participants were 124 out of a population of 162 high school special education teachers in a large suburban school district in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Data was collected via survey and focus groups.; The information gathered was divided into four sections: determining factors, student characteristics, school policies, and teacher characteristics. Important elements of the research design included: (a) the focus groups to aid in the development of the survey and to add depth to the interpretation of the data and (b) the systematic coding to assist in the reduction of data. In addition, tables were used extensively to display the descriptive data in response to the research questions.; The findings indicated that the majority of teachers' educational philosophy and curriculum foci of essential skills were reflected in curriculum decisions. The factors that had the greatest influence on high school special education teachers were adaptability of the curriculum for life skills and student outcomes. The curriculum preference of high school special education teachers included aspects from a functional based curriculum, general education curriculum, and a teacher made curriculum. The strongest accountability measure for teachers was the IEP/ITP document. The student characteristics which had the greatest impact on decision making were student disability and students' reading skills. Of the school policies that influenced teachers' choice of curriculum, the Maryland Functional Tests were a major political reform initiative that impacted curriculum selection. State mandated tests directed what was taught and written on the IEP/ITPs. The major teacher characteristics that influenced curriculum choice were experience and professional involvement in curriculum development. The results were discussed in terms of six salient themes, as well as in terms of special education practices and implications for further research.