Organization, Administration, and Supervision of Special Education

Abstract

This chapter reviews the literature written between 1963 and 1965 concerned with the theory and function of administering special education programs. The paucity of specific research on administration of special education continues to plague the reviewer. Milazzo and Blessing (1964), in a report of the current practices in the training of directors and supervisors of special education, infer two basic problems which may have a direct bearing on research effort in this area of inquiry: (a) College personnel involved in training programs for administration and supervision of special education typically lack specific training and experience essential to conducting real research in special education administration. (b) Representative training programs for leadership personnel indicate such low priority for the development of research skills that administrators and supervisors, on initiative alone, cannot be expected to make up the deficit. Further, Hodgson (1964) indicated that professors of school administration in colleges and universities preparing administrators and supervisors for regular school as well as for special education may be critically ignorant of or in disagreement with modern concepts of programs and processes involving public education of exceptional children. Perhaps, as Willenberg (1964) suggested, a basic tool such as a textbook on administration of special education would serve a useful purpose, if only to rally enough facts and interest to generate worthwhile hypotheses in the realms of rationale, structure, and process involved in the administration of special education programs. In their study of problems peculiar to administrators and supervisors of special education in 13 Western states, Wisland and Vaughan (1964) found that administrators and supervisors were concerned with their inability to carry out research. Finding adequate time to carry out research ranked fifth among the 10 most significant problems identified. Havighurst (1964) recommended that at least 1 percent of the annual cost of operating special education programs in Chicago public schools should be spent on research and evaluation. If time is equated with money, his recommendation could generally serve as a useful reference point for state and local directors of special education in planning their budgets.