How Does the Quality and Stability of the Teaching Force Influence the Research-to-Practice Gap?: A Perspective on the Teacher Shortage in Special Education
Abstract
Although effective practices have been developed to address the needs of a wide range of students with disabilities, evidence suggests a limited use of these practices. Potential contributors to the research-to-practice gap focus on problems with pre-service teacher preparation, professional development, and the nature of research. The authors present evidence that the lack of well-qualified special education teachers, the instability of special education teachers in teaching positions (i.e., attrition and migration), and inadequate work conditions contribute to the research-to-practice gap. They also address the need for comprehensive, coordinated, and sustained efforts to reduce the teacher shortage and improve the likelihood that special educators have the work conditions needed to use effective practices.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Special educators leave at an annual rate of 13%, double the general education rate, with roughly 25% leaving over three years.
“The annual attrition rate for special educators (13%) is twice that of general educators, and the three-year attrition rate is approximately 25% (Cook & Boe, 2007; McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008).”
From Too Stressed to Teach? Teaching Quality, Student Engagement, and IEP Outcomes (2017) · cites this paper as McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008
Stressed or burned-out teachers are more likely to quit, which can destabilize and lower the quality of the teaching workforce and may harm student learning.
“Teachers who are stressed or experience burnout are more likely to leave school, leading to an unstable and potentially lower quality teaching workforce, which in turn may negatively influence student learning”
From Too Stressed to Teach? Teaching Quality, Student Engagement, and IEP Outcomes (2017) · cites this paper as McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008
Prior literature describes burnout as indirectly harming student learning by increasing attrition.
“The existing literature has described burnout as having an indirect negative influence on student learning through its effect on attrition.”
From Too Stressed to Teach? Teaching Quality, Student Engagement, and IEP Outcomes (2017) · cites this paper as McLeskey & Billingsley, 2008
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 71 · Cited by 199
- Authors
- McLeskey, J., & Billingsley, B. S.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida (US)
- Virginia Tech (US)
- Venue
- Remedial and Special Education
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-04-07
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 293-305
- ISSN
- 0741-9325 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4756
- OpenAlex
- W2112561393
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 11.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Remedial and Special Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Collaborative Teaching and Inclusion
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Professional Development and Motivation
- Keywords
- research-practice gap, special education teachers, teacher attrition, teacher migration, teacher shortage, teacher working conditions, initial teacher education, professional development, teacher quality, teacher stability, students with disabilities
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
