Didáctica

cisions to stay or leave the small school environment. I also used the data in an iterative approach to inform the interview questions in the next phase (See Appendix D and E).

Analysis of Special Education Teacher Support Questionnaire. My unit of analysis for the questionnaire was the scores recorded by participants on the Likert scale items. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the mean and standard deviation of each item (Boone & Boone, 2012). The questionnaire consisted of 14 categories, with a variable number of items in each category (between 1 and 12 items). My analysis was based on the mean Likert-ratings and the standard deviations for each item, as seen in Appendix D. The statements were phrased such that Strongly Agree was always the stronger factor impacting the decision to stay (influencing reten- tion), and Strongly Disagree was the weaker factor (influencing attrition). Because the purpose of my research was to examine retention of special education teachers in small schools, I ana- lyzed the questionnaire in light of the factors that had the most positive influence on teachers’ decisions to stay in their small school positions.

I examined the standard deviation results to determine where there was less agreement in teacher responses. I used those items with larger standard deviations to alter my interview proto- col by developing additional questions to use in the interviews during Phase 2. The greatest stan- dard deviation reflected the least agreement. Sixty-eight percent of the values lie within one standard deviation of the mean, so in this questionnaire, I considered any standard deviation higher than 1 to be high. The categories with high standard deviations (greater than 1) were: Fac- tors Contributing to Manageability of Workload, Stress Related to Job Design, Role Conflict, Opportunities for Growth and Advancement, and Adequacy of Materials and Space. I added or revised interview questions to the original protocol (Appendix D) to elicit more responses in or- der to examine the variability in these areas. The initial questions and corresponding new ques- tions are listed in Table 5.

Analysis of PMRFs and documents. The PMRFs, caseload lists, and teacher schedules provided another source to determine the influence of district administration, caseload size, stu- dent disabilities, and time on teacher retention decisions. The documents triangulated my data sources as an extension of the other research methods, especially targeting the following catego- ries that appeared in the questionnaire and/or in the literature review:

• PMRFs were used to determine the effect of the district special education meetings on teachers, and how the teachers perceived the meetings as a method of district support; • Caseload lists were used to determine the number of students and the severity of the dis-

abilities of the children served by each teacher, to support the comments about stress or workload related to caseload;

Table 5

Teacher Protocol Questions Changed or Added in Response to High SD on Questionnaire Initial Question on Protocol Revised/Added Question on New Protocol

Talk about how the central office administrators affect your work and your deci- sion to stay.

Questionnaire responses about the support from the district admin- istrator were varied. How do the following affect you in your job? • Frequency of feedback from the district special education ad-

ministrator

• How helpful the feedback from the DA is • the DA’s ability to reduce the stress of your job What kinds of things make

your work stressful, or cre- ate stress for your col- leagues?

Most respondents to the questionnaire feel stress related to their job, due to the severity of their students’ needs, the range of needs and abilities, behavior and discipline problems, bureaucratic re- quirements and paperwork, lack of time, conflicting goals or direc- tives. Talk about stress as it relates to your specific job and duties. No specific question on

initial protocol

There were a variety of answers about the manageability of the workload as a special educator in the district. How do you feel about the workload? What affects it most? (Size of caseload? Size of groups? Things you are expected to do? Severity of students’ disabilities?)

No specific question on initial protocol

The questions about role conflict also had responses spread out from high to low. Talk about your experiences with role conflict regarding:

• Time spent working directly with students vs. with their class- room teachers

• The expectations of the district special education department and the principal's expectations

• Teaching to the standards and meeting students' needs

• The way lessons are taught in the general education classroom and what is effective with your students, and

• Attending to students' academic needs vs. their so- cial/behavioral needs

No specific question on

• Special education teachers’ schedules were used to determine how much time was avail- able to plan lessons and collaborate with general education teachers and each other dur- ing the workday.

Phase 2 data analysis. The first stage of Phase 2 consisted of initial interviews with the