Joelle Fingerhut, Linda A. Reddy, Christopher Dudek, Briana Bronstein, Amanda Elliot
{"title":"Classroom Paraprofessional and Teachers Serving Students with Disruptive Behaviors: A Study of Professional Relationships","authors":"Joelle Fingerhut, Linda A. Reddy, Christopher Dudek, Briana Bronstein, Amanda Elliot","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2271588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTLimited research has examined the qualities of paraprofessional and teacher relationships in schools. Teachers’ and paraprofessionals’ ability to communicate and collaborate are important for guiding supports for their students. The present study examined characteristics affecting the professional relationship of paraprofessional and teacher pairs working within the same classroom across 58 elementary schools. A total of 108 pairs of paraprofessionals and teachers were asked to independently complete a multidimensional assessment of relationship quality, as well as a demographic survey. Findings overall indicate that both classroom teachers and their paraprofessionals rate their relationship qualities favorably, with paraprofessionals rating relationships more positively than teachers (ds = .28 − .34). However, there are differences in relationship ratings by race and ethnicity. Implications are discussed and suggestions are given so that paraprofessionals and teachers can continue to develop positive relationships. Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Teacher PTRS Total; Skewness = −2.45, Kurtosis = 7.21, W = .74(p < .001). Teacher PTRS Joining; Skewness = −2.86, Kurtosis = 8.94, W = .65(p < .001). Teacher PTRS Communication; Skewness = −1.32, Kurtosis = 1.98, W = .84(p < .001). Paraprofessional PTRS total; Skewness = −1.69, Kurtosis = 3.15, W = .79(p < .001). Paraprofessional PTRS Joining; Skewness = −2.66, Kurtosis = 9.95, W = .70(p < .001). Paraprofessional PTRS Communication; Skewness = −1.61, Kurtosis = 2.00, W = .73(p < .001).Additional informationFundingThe research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences to Rutgers University (R324A170069). The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the IES. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Joelle Fingerhut School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Marist College, 3399 North Rd, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601. Contact: joelle.fingerhut@marist.edu","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":"104 24","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Exceptionality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2271588","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACTLimited research has examined the qualities of paraprofessional and teacher relationships in schools. Teachers’ and paraprofessionals’ ability to communicate and collaborate are important for guiding supports for their students. The present study examined characteristics affecting the professional relationship of paraprofessional and teacher pairs working within the same classroom across 58 elementary schools. A total of 108 pairs of paraprofessionals and teachers were asked to independently complete a multidimensional assessment of relationship quality, as well as a demographic survey. Findings overall indicate that both classroom teachers and their paraprofessionals rate their relationship qualities favorably, with paraprofessionals rating relationships more positively than teachers (ds = .28 − .34). However, there are differences in relationship ratings by race and ethnicity. Implications are discussed and suggestions are given so that paraprofessionals and teachers can continue to develop positive relationships. Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Teacher PTRS Total; Skewness = −2.45, Kurtosis = 7.21, W = .74(p < .001). Teacher PTRS Joining; Skewness = −2.86, Kurtosis = 8.94, W = .65(p < .001). Teacher PTRS Communication; Skewness = −1.32, Kurtosis = 1.98, W = .84(p < .001). Paraprofessional PTRS total; Skewness = −1.69, Kurtosis = 3.15, W = .79(p < .001). Paraprofessional PTRS Joining; Skewness = −2.66, Kurtosis = 9.95, W = .70(p < .001). Paraprofessional PTRS Communication; Skewness = −1.61, Kurtosis = 2.00, W = .73(p < .001).Additional informationFundingThe research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences to Rutgers University (R324A170069). The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the IES. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Joelle Fingerhut School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Marist College, 3399 North Rd, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601. Contact: joelle.fingerhut@marist.edu