Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress International Special Education Conference Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity? 1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland

home about the conference programme registration accommodation contact

Special education teachers in Greece: the loneliness and ambiguity of a profession

Evangelia Boutskou PhD Candidate
University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
ebutsku@otenet.gr

ABSTRACT

Special education teachers at primary schools in Greece is a heterogeneous group of people who followed different routes to end up in special education. This paper uses life histories of teachers working with various types of special needs at both special education schools and integration units in order to listen to their voices and reveal how they were involved with special teaching and how they interpret their role. The qualitative analysis of the teachers’ interviews reveals that there are three types of special education teachers:

• the “enthusiastic novices”, used to be experienced mainstream teachers who moved recently in special education. They are concerned with the micro level of what is going on in their own school and how they should cope with the children and the significant others.
• the “ mid-career fighters”,   have enough experience from both special schools and integration units. They are concerned about how they should develop their professional self and interpret their role at a macro level
• the “burned out”, spent many years teaching in special education and wait for their retirement. They are disappointed by the significant others during their career and they are much concerned about their own pupils and their personal self.

This work also comments on the ambiguity of the special education teachers’ role and the marginality of the profession highlighted by the dramatic changes in recent legislation.

SETTING THE SCENE

Special Education in Greece was established in the national educational system and it was accepted by consensus of all the political parties in the Parliament in March 1981.From the academic year 1983-84 the Ministry of Education introduced the integration approach to children with special needs but it applied segregation. Special Education could be provided at either autonomous special schools or special education classes at Mainstream schools. The necessity for these schools derived from the notion of people for academic achievement (Zoniou-Sideri, 1996) and the categories of uselessness. Children with severe and profound special educational needs usually attended special schools. Pupils with learning difficulties were segregated and they attended special education classes at Mainstream schools (Patsalis,1994, Zoniou-Sideri, 1998). Despite the legislative claims there were no official special programmes and curricula for pupils attending special schools or special classes (Spetsiotis,Mavronas,Oikonomou,1999). Moreover there was a lack of suitable books (Floratou, 1994) and equipment (Spetsiotis, Mavronas, Oikonomou, 1999).

Nowadays according to the recent legislation 2817/2000 the Ministry initiates inclusion and introduces the notion of a school for all and encourages the modifications of school curricula according to the abilities and disabilities of pupils. The mainstream school does not seem to be a place for all despite the government claims. Inclusion is the rhetoric. Special classes were renamed to integration units, special schools renamed school units of special education but nothing changed in the way of their running.

THE ROLE OF THE SPECIAL TEACHER IN GREECE

The special education teacher in Greece used to be a qualified Mainstream education teacher who either graduated from a 2 year in-service training course in Special education or held a Master’s degree.

 A review of the limited Greek literature shows that the role of the Special education teacher is constantly changing depending on the contexts. Initially in the 80s the special teacher deemed as a person who was confronting many difficulties and problems. He/she usually had to take decisions that were based on ethical-emotional assessments. The Special education teacher was the undoubtedly and irreplaceable servant of Special Education (Kalatzis, 1976). The well established view that special teachers with special knowledge and special skills are necessary for special children was initiated by the ordinary teachers who did not deemed themselves proper for teaching children with special needs. Ordinary teachers accepted special education teachers initially thinking that they themselves would be benefited by the fact that the children with Special Educational Needs would not be their responsibility. So a new occupational group, special teachers emerged as a demand. Special education teachers were looked at as missionaries that would enter into an unknown field teaching difficult children. On the other hand special education teachers were benefited by their penetration to the professional network. They became “specialists” and developed interests in the field of special education. The fact that special teachers are paid a money bonus (20% of the salary) was a strong motive for one to enter the field (Charami et al, 1998).

 In the 90s special education teachers were strongly criticized because they did not have any special training. In 1983 the 91% of teaching staff in special schools/classes had no special training because in-service training ran only in Athens. The lack of training made them   feel “dissatisfied and insecure” while they were blamed for “immature, unscientific, and low level teaching” (Barbas, 1983). The diagnosis of children with learning difficulties was made by the mainstream and special teacher by subjective criteria without the application and use of psychopedagogical tests (Stasinos, 1991).In 1997 only 40% of teachers who worked at special schools/classes held in service training Diploma or a Master’s degree (Nikodimos,1995;Eustathiou,1997).   A typology   developed by Kitsaras (1994) claimed that there were three categories of Special teachers:

• those who cover their inefficiency and take advantage of the loneliness of special school/class.
• those who do their job and act deontological. The majority of the special teachers are included in this category.
• those teachers who identify the moral requirements of their job and they try to apply them.

This typology implies that there is a climax of job responsibility based on the moral values as the only criterion.

In the last decade, the role of the special teacher is to balance the ethical and legitimate with the pedagogically correct in an effective way so that the child can develop his/her abilities (Zoniou-Sideri,1996). However, this role description is child-centered and fails to acknowledge the personal interpretations of teachers and the contextual dimensions of the job. The role of special education teachers is multifaceted. It is not only to train and educate pupils with special needs at school but also to trait, diagnose and tackle the special needs in cooperation with parents, the other teachers of school, the other professionals and make society aware of the special needs (Xanthopoulos & Sakkas, 1997).

RATIONALE

Being a special education teacher myself, I was quite interested in finding an explanation to “what is going on with my colleagues, with my culture”.   The best method to find an answer was to dive into the culture and collect life histories from the special education teachers.

Life histories of special education teachers  at primary schools in Greece are important to be studied for the following reasons:

Firstly, although special education has been developed the last years there is not much educational and sociological analysis in the field. There are no studies investigated the lives and careers of special teachers and there is no evidence about special teachers’ experiences. Secondly, life histories might sketch these changes over time seen by a vantage point and will reveal the complexities of experience, the role conflicts over time and give insights about the nature of the job. They can be used as ways of understanding who is the special teacher in Greece and what is special teaching illustrating how teachers give meaning to their role and responsibilities. Thirdly, Special education teachers were never asked about their perceptions of their job, the interpretations of their role, the difficulties they encounter and the needs they have. Teachers’ experience is the stuff of culture. Teachers’ role is grounded in every day practice in specific contexts and it is constructed within the uncertain, conflict-field world of school settings. Life histories legitimate teachers’ professional memory and make it possible to return to experience as a resource for teachers’ professionalism. They provide new opportunities of deepening relations with the others, contribute to the creation of shared knowledge and meaning that can inform about professional practice. The historical dimension can help to place current issues into context and enable teachers to define themselves as active participants of the world.

Under these perspectives the aim of the study is to:

• explore the role of the special teachers in Greece- what are their experiences of working in particular types of schools and classes with different types of special needs
• to understand how teachers give meaning to their experiences and how these experiences influence their practice.

RESEARCH PROCEDURE

The dynamic interplay between person and context made me chose different types of special education schools and special education classes at Primary schools. I interviewed 6 special education teachers. Three teachers worked at special education schools with different types   of special needs, namely: 1 teacher from the school for the Blind , 1 from the school for children with motor difficulties, 1 from the school for children with severe learning difficulties and three teachers worked at special education classes at mainstream schools, namely: 1 teacher from a special education class at a mainstream school situated in rural area, 1 teacher from a school at an area with low socio-economic status area, 1 teacher from a school at a high socio-economic status area. Unfortunately no teacher for the deaf accepted to participate in the research.

Special Education teachers had a working experience between 5-17 years. Spradley (1979 cited in Plummer 1983) claims that a good informant should be someone who is fully aware and involved in the particular culture. I think that working for 5 years in special education is adequately time to have many experiences that help one build his/her theory and attitude towards special education and difference. At this point it is interesting to mention that in the past, before the 1466 Law in 1985 the special education teachers were less than 100 in the whole Greece. There was an increase of the establishment of special schools and special classes after 1985. This   means that the vast majority   of the special education teachers can not have teaching experience in special teaching   that is more than 17 years. So their special education experience varied from 5-17 years.

Table 1: Characteristics of the special education teachers of the study

A typology based on teacher’s age developed by Sikes et al (1985) was initially used in order to have more complete accounts of what it means to be a special education teacher acknowledging the fact that the phases or stages run the risk of losing the complexity (Harris, 1999) and that this typology was applied on a British and not Greek context. I realized that teachers had a huge unemployment problem and any typology based on age would not be efficient. Moreover in the past a mainstream teacher could become a special education teacher after completing five years teaching experience in mainstream schooling and passing exams for a two-year in service training. So a special education teacher with 5 years of teaching experience in special education usually is in her/his late 30s. For this reason   the age of the teachers of the sample varied from 38-51 years old.

As far as teachers’ ethnicity is concerned, the sample included only Greek teachers because there are only Greek special education teachers at primary schools in Greece according to the Law. Greece has become a multicultural city the last decade and there are no teachers from the ethnic minorities in special education. However a latest presidential decree allows teachers from other countries to work in primary schools on condition that they have proficiency in the Greek language.

Interviews with teachers started in January 2002 and lasted until October 2003. I was much influenced by techniques developed concerning life story and narrative (Goodson & Sikes, 2001; Atkinson, 1998)) and concerned about the ethical dilemmas. I took three interviews of each teacher. The duration of each interview was from one hour and a half up to three hours. Interviews took place where teachers preferred in order to feel safe, secure and relaxed e.g. their classroom, or an office or at home. After the second interview I produced a synthesis text and I gave them to read and comment on it. The third interview happened after the teachers gave me feedback from the synthesis text they read.

I also interviewed heads during the main interviews because the head of the school has been identified as a key to the quality of staff development and as a factor that influences the professional life of teachers. Key informants play a multidimensional role as they are the source of important information about the social and cultural patterns of their group. They can report events not directly observed by the researcher, they reveal specialized information and they contribute to our holistic understanding of a culture. They may give a deep understanding of the setting and their views used as cross check of the emerging themes.

All the teachers’ interviews were taped and fully transcribed as the major source for data analysis. All the teachers are senior teachers and their names are pseudonyms.

The analysis of this data focused on identifying important themes common to the teachers’ views of teaching as a career. Then I created a process of data analysis using grounded theory  to create and compare categories across individual cases (Strauus, 1987; Strauus & Corbin, 1990). By constant comparison method I created grounded codes and categories.

RESEARCH OUTCOMES

Based on the two axes of years of teaching experience and attitude towards the profession teachers were classified into three categories:

a) the enthusiast-novices: Mary,( Special Education Class   at a high social-economic status area),   Kate (School for children with motor difficulties)

b) the mid-career fighters: Michael (Special Education Class at a rural area), Jack (Special Education Class   at a low social-economic status area

c)   the burned-out : Leo ( School for the blind), John (School for children with severe difficulties).

The enthusiast novices

Although Mary had only the experience of the special classes and Kate the experience of the special school they have many things in common. They are at a phase of learning on the job about the job and their   aspirations about their new role are accommodated within the school context. School events are perceived in isolation and are limited to here and now. Both of them as novice teachers face the challenge of finding and negotiating a place in their own school. The head, colleagues and parents are the significant others and the micro politics of school play important role. Both of them are devoted to the teaching profession. Kate is mainly concerned with providing quality education for her own children while Mary is moved by improving the functioning and the philosophy of the school institution

Mary   who works at a special education class seems to spend much effort in acceptance of herself and her pupils from school   while Kate   who works at a special school seems to spend much effort in developing her work with children. This is an outward and inward journey respectively.   Mary is not accepted by colleagues and she is mainly occupied with juggling the multiple demands of the colleagues and the head. She is concerned about what is going on withher classin her school and not concerned about what she is doing   in her class. Mary is challenged by “what is going on outside my classroom but inside the school”. This may derive from the notion that special class teaching means mainstream teaching at a lower level. Mary tries to give an answer to the questions “where do I stand up in this school?” “How do the others perceive me and my students”. Her main concern is coping with the colleagues and exploring their perspectives towards her and her students.

Mary

The critical incident for Mary took the form of a direct challenge to her authority by the head and colleagues and thereby a challenge for her professional identity. Mary’s every day routine is a negotiation process and struggle with the colleagues and heads. Her prime aim is to change the school conditions towards the children and consequently for her. She sees herself as an agent of the children in her school and at the same time she is struggling for her status at school. She thinks that her relations with heads and colleagues are difficult because of three reasons:

First, they have not accepted the children and they do not acknowledge their rights.

“ The head wanted me to create a group of 3 children with special needs and teach them all the time at the special class, so that we should not let these children enter the mainstream class. I did not accept it and I told him that we accept the children at school in order to include them and not to do this…heads do not want  to be responsible for these children   ”

Secondly, they do not respect the role of the special education teacher.

“ She (the head) wanted to write a minute and change the legislation of special education, all the legislation that rules the function of the special class and tailor it to her case…she wanted to use me as a replacement teacher when there is an absent teacher….In addition she(the head) wanted the children with special needs not to take part in the school activities and excursions eg. When we (the school) go to the church or to the theater or to an excursion, these children (with special needs) should not go and I should stay at school with these children. I went to the Consultant and asked his support.He advised the Head many times on issues like these ”

Thirdly, the money bonus because of the “special” teaching makes them jealous. Heads and colleagues try to devalue the role of the special class teacher because they are jealous of the money bonus and the “expertise” as a consequence of the extra training.

“Many times she (the head) told me that you take the money bonus and I as a head take less money. I told her that we take the money bonus because we offer, not by accident, I explained her that she takes the extra money because of her administrative work and I for my teaching work.. This is a misery, this should not happen among the colleagues” (I., p.5)

Although Mary is not accepted by school she is quite enthusiast by her job because she is in the process of changing the dominant school culture towards disability. Special class is a new issue at school and thus, an issue for negotiation. As a consequence the role of the special class teacher is continually under negotiation. Mary has the feeling of “capacity” (Biott, 1991) she feels able to influence and shape the direction and goals of her work and her institution because she has the Consultant’s support. This feeling of capacity makes her try to change the situation and influence the conditions as well the philosophy of the school. Her struggle to influence the others gives meaning to her life at work. Although the relations with heads and colleagues were not good, she felt dissatisfied by them but not by her job.   As a counter balance she had the feeling of achievement and recognition from parents and consultants. Her self-esteem is boosted by the good   relation she has with parents and she interprets it as a recognition and acknowledgement. She deems herself as a link between parents and school.

“I have not had a problem with parents. I love the parents and they love me too. They hang on my lips, from me what to say was d. ok today, did he make any trouble? And   not a problem”

Kate

Kate does not face any particular problems with colleagues and heads and she is much concerned about what she is doing with children inside her classroom. This may derive from the fact that at a special school you have to face unknown cases of needs and difficulties. This inevitably makes you feel that you have to cope with the unknown and develop yourself to help the children make their needs met. Kate is concerned about herself as a teacher and she is trying to answer to the questions “Who am I as a teacher?” “Where do my limits end up? Her immediate concern is coping with the job in the classroom and exploring herself as a teacher.  

Disability is taken for granted at Kate’s school so all teachers do the same things at school and their roles do not differ. Kate accepts the school conditions and she is mutually accepted by the school. The critical incident for Kate had to do with the first days at school where she experienced the “praxis” shock or the “reality” shock when she came face to face with the wheelchairs and had to explore and expand the emotions and abilities or skills(hers and children’s).

 ‘ the first day I was socked because all   the children with their wheelchairs were gathers at the assembly line and I have never seen   it before, because I have never visited the place before... I was socked and the feelings were mixed. At first you feel pity , the first day I did not feel good but when you live at this place, I do not mean that you become indifferent but you feel that you should stop feeling pity and I no longer feel pity. I got used to this school very fast” (I., p.8-9) Of course I do not think what will happen to these children in the future. If I think about it, I am down and I prefer not to think about it.”

She uses reactive strategies aiming to maintain the situation and improve herslf. Kate has the feeling of “opportunity” (Biott,1991)feeling able to improve her performance and herself   which generates the enthusiasm and motivation to do it better. She has the feeling of achievement because of her personal growth and children’ progress.She feels that she has good communication with children and that she is getting better year by year. She is trying to develop herself all the time and she is never relaxed with herself. She is very committed to teaching and she does not interpret her career as a vertical mobility but as a career of horizontal mobility. .

“I would like to go on here for 3-5 years more. I   like changes I do not want to sit at the same place all the time I would like after 2 years to go to a mainstream school and fill my batteries and then again to a special school because here to tell you the truth it is a problem that you have to be at a low level…I would not like to be the head. It does not interest me. I am interested in the work in the classroom. I like and I am enthusiastic about only the things that happen inside the classroom”

Her job is a personal challenge and extension seeking elements of variety and change and the professional mingle with the personal.

“ though my job I try to get to know myself. It is magnificent to try to keep your nerves if you want to yell or to say shut up and instead of this you count up to ten and   say “children could you stop it please?’. I feel that I build myself through the classroom work, I think that may job is a part of me. I see it as a part of me” .

A key dimension in her work is the fact that she is in control of what is going on in her class. She is experiencing an increasing sense of professional autonomy and this gives her personal fulfilment. She likes the fact that she is very autonomous and free to work they way she decides.

“I like the fact that I can be freer here than in a mainstream school, I can be more me myself. I like the fact that I can escape from the cliché you are when you work in the mainstream school I can do different things and not the traditional and formal thing that you open the books and do this., . I feel more free to dance and make them laugh…because some things are more important here... I like that there is freedom in the classroom, I feel as if I were at my home and I do something to my own children and there is some freedom of that type… I like that there is freedom at my class … I like teaching here because I express myself in ways that I would not dare if I were at a mainstream school I want to be a teacher that the children want to come next to her and I do not want to be a cliché , strict teacher and maybe the reason I like this school is that I can express myself more and talk sweet to children”

Both Mary and Kate like their job and they feel that they are good teachers. They are quite cool and relaxed with themselves as teachers because they are not novice in teaching. They have enough mainstream teaching experience and they have the natural authority of age. They feel that they are newcomers but not novices. Their previous experience is quite strong and made them establish the identity of the mainstream teacher which they do not forget. As special education teachers experience schooling from another point of view, keeping a distance from the ordinary school (Kate), keeping a distance from the ordinary   lass   and being on the periphery of the school(Mary). Their feeling of professional competence derives also from the typical qualifications and the special children’ acceptance and interaction. Both of them seem to have good relation with parents and they feel that they are much respected by them. They may have from typical to friendly relations and the good relations make them feel that they are acknowledged. They believe in themselves because they are appreciated by the Consultants.

Both of them seem quite passionate with their job despite the fact that they acknowledge that their work is very difficult. Both of them adopt a motherly attitude to children. They both feel servants of children’ needs.

The mid-career fighters

Both of them studied another field initially and became teachers as a back up choice, a second alternative or a parallel career. Michael used to be a journalist and Jack studied Law. However, they became quite enthusiasts with the philosophy underpinning special education and decided to pursue a career on the field. They tried to have a diverse special teaching experience. Both of them have the experience of the special education school and the special education class. They interpret the field of special education by seeing from these two different angles. They do not hesitate to challenge school practices and social realities. They take a realistic and pragmatic approach concerning the practicalities of the job and mention that their role has a dual perspective as worker- social servant and as an intellectual-initiator of change.

They do not take special teaching as a job in which they would only meet the minimum requirements as a teachers but they are visionaries. They are idealistic fighters and career explorers because they expressed enthusiasm for improving education while exploring ways in which to engage themselves in the educational enterprise, in which teaching is just one of the possibilities. They moved from special school with severe cases to special class with mild learning difficulties. They feel sufficiently experienced and capable of taking on more responsibility. Both of them used their special education experience as a step up to the hierarchy ladder.(if you work on special education you take some more credits when you apply for the headship).  One year after the interviews Michael became a head at a mainstream school and Jack a principal at Center for Diagnosis, Intervention and Support of special needs. Both challenged traditional practices in the promotion ways   and they applied at these posts because they wanted to be active in a changing professional world. They wanted to be reflective to the new principles and ready to criticize and influence the system by different posts. They feel that active involvement in policy and decision making as a part of their role.

They do not stick to the school but they expand their thought to what is going on in the educational system and the broader social context of education. They make comparisons and they form some theoretical principles mediated between experience and theory. They have shaped and well worked their theory of what is going on in education and not only to what is going on in their own schools. They think that “special needs” is a social construction   and consider special education in a holistic way. They realize that special education is a multidimensional issue with many people involved.Children are deemed not only as students but as future citizens. They think that parents are partners who are helpless and deserve better consultant services and guidance from the state. They realized that special education teachers need regular support and feedback.

They speak out about their rights and obligations as a different occupational group from mainstream teachers as well as Special Education Staff and they are much concerned about the authority and status of their profession concerning mainstream teachers, other disciplines and the market. They strive to enhance the interests, rights of their occupational group. They realized that the special education field is an arena, a micro-system of vested interests and view other professionals as counter parts.

They were quite passionate as teachers. They worked voluntarily and helped children with learning difficulties free of charge. Soon their interests about children shifted into interests of their professional self. Their concerns moved from children’s needs and interests to their professional needs and interests. Although initially they felt as children’ agents they became agents of their special education colleagues. They strive for change in the macro level.

Michael

Michael deems that Special teaching is the platform to express and expand his ideas and also his job is seen as a means to make a difference to society through education. He was motivated by the inclusion of all children as a social need.

He mentions the discrimination that the special class teachers face compared to the other mainstream teachers.

“at a special education class you are criticized more than any other teacher who has a classroom… I mean difference creates a different criticism. The thing is how much you can persuade them   that this special class and   this teacher placement should exist. This depends on your personality and whether you persuade them that you can give some solutions… the special class teacher is usually isolated from the other teachers because he is considered to do something different and many times they think that he does not do anything at all. It is up to him to deconstruct this condition as long as this view   is not taken for granted and many colleagues have it as obsession.”

He moves from the micro level of what is going on in his school to the macro level to what is going on with the special education teachers in general. He deems special education teachers as a group of teachers and himself as a member of a group different from the mainstream teachers.   He is an agent of the special education teachers.

“From the teaching   perspective we have more workload concerning preparation and we do not have a curriculum and   a certain book to follow and solve our problem “what we should teach the children”. From the working perspective we work 25 hours regardless the years of teaching and it is not logical. I should work 22 hours per week if I were a mainstream teacher and I now work 25.Moreover, we can not apply to be   a vice head at a mainstream school which I also think that it is not logical. Either you are a member of the school or not.”

He formulated some personal opinion about the role of the special class and the special school and the teacher’s role.

“I do not think that Special education for very severe cases has the meaning of  classical education   but   it is the cure of the soul. Special teachers at a special school are not teachers. The special class teacher is a therapist,   a specialist. At a special school you do not teach the children but you try to establish a relation with the kid. It is a matter of communication and   you use   different ways to at some points reach with the children.. The role of the special class teacher is firstly to cover psychologically the children that have problems and are excluded from the general group and secondly to support them at the learning domain, concerning skills and their performance at the lessons

Jack

Jack was motivated by a far reaching vision for improving the functioning of the system. He devoted himself to the special teaching profession by striving to improve the working conditions of special education teachers and defend the rights of the special education teachers and the rights of the children at school.

When Jack worked at the special school situated next to a mainstream school he deemed himself as an initiator of change at mainstream teachers’ attitude.

‘The special school was segregated to a mainstream school. There was a negative climate because we did not have much space and classrooms and clichés between the schools. We (special school teachers) tried to draw the curtain; we tried to enlighten the dark clouds of thoughts (of mainstream teachers) which may cultivate dangerous views about children and about even ourselves. We were on patrol at the playground, both school had the same breaks and we (the special school teachers) were out at the playground together with children and the mainstream colleagues. It was then that we broke the prejudice. When   colleagues saw us that we were next to the children during the breaks every day and we cleaned their nose or wipe up their saliva, they looked at us in a positive way and they were asking us things about the children and we discussed   and they developed a rather positive stance to all of us.’

He is involved with politics and he is a member of the local trade union. He is very energetic and quite demanding.

“They (governors)   make the special class teacher work 25 hours while their mainstream   colleagues with the same teaching experience work less hours. Moreover we( special class teachers) are not allowed to apply for the Vice Head posts. They violate the rights of equal opportunities at work…We took them in courts. We fought for this not only because as a vice head you take more credits for the assessments but because when the special class teachers become vice heads or heads they would support the philosophy of inclusion. Only if they enter the power mechanisms and when they become superiors they could spread the philosophy of inclusion”

Jack underlines the difference between the school practice and the educational   policy.

“I think that educational policy in Greece has not a philosophical platform. Educational policy is far away from the educational practice. They lack methodological instruments and analyses”

He expands the role of the special education teacher who should be an active member of society.

“The special education teacher is the person who should be educated and should be involved with social issues and have a political orientation and action. Special education teachers should ask for the democracy in society”.

The burned-out

Both of them have high morale but their energy and enthusiasm for the job is declining because of aging and because they have tasted the “sour grapes” of their inability to influence and change their professional world. John was promoted to the deputy head of the school but denied it when he realized that the authority role was the disguise and that he could not work as he liked because of the bureaucracy and the school environment. He could not be a pioneer or an initiator or a person bringing the change and he returned back in teaching. He had relative confidence in his ability to do the job and declining ambition to become a Consultant since he did not have the qualifications. Leo is not eager to be up in the hierarchy because he knows that he lacks the qualifications.

Both of them feel burned out and they have health problems. Their concerns are about their own needs and their own class needs. They develop a more relaxed attitude towards their job because they are one step before their retirement. They feel that they have their views based on their aging and experience at work. They feel that they were not as much appreciated by others as they deserved it. They are disappointed by significant others, the hierarchy, special staff and parents. They feel that their superiors can not guide them and they feel that parents are indifferent to them or that they do not have any kind of relation and this means that they feel that their work is not appreciated.

John worked at the same school for many years. John stayed at the same school thinking that the more you stay at a school the more rights you have, as in the army. On the other hand, Leo changed many places and has a diverse experience working with children with different needs at different contexts. Leo’s career was a change of placements in a horizontal axis (same post at different schools) while John’s career had a change of placemants in a vertical axis. Leo changed schools and placements at a horizontal axis when he felt that he could not serve the purpose of the special class or to find better school conditions

John is dissatisfied because he realized that either as a vice head or a teacher could not be so effective as he would like because the change he had dreamed about was not easy to be brought about. Leo is dissatisfied by the fact that he can not   teach at a school he would like because there are no vacancies there.

John

John is disappointed by significant others: colleagues, Special Education Staff, parents.

Colleagues at special school did not help him and the first years were tiresome but on the other hand he liked working hard. He felt abandoned by his colleagues and realized that there was no collegial support. The loneliness and personal struggle of teaching went on for next years, he felt inadequate with no support.

“When I came here, they gave me …, the most difficult children, each one was different from the other. … my colleagues could not help me to what I did because they did not work a certain programme with the children … I had a very bad school year and I was even thinking to resign or to change job… I was very tired. It was very tiring to teach the same children for many hours”.

The cooperation with the Special Education staff is problematic. John thinks that the school psychologist does not cooperate with the teaching stuff and does not help the children as much as she could.

“they [psychologists, social workers, etc] may help you in some things because they discuss with the parents, not with anything else...The psychologist is not every day with the kid. She made a diagnosis about the abilities of the children once and since then she hasn’t helped the kid emotionally, she has not follow a program or anything else special for the   children. The psychologist   should discuss with teachers and tell them some things in order to apply and see if they might work. This does not happen…eh There is a deficiency and incompetence…They like authority, and autonomy and think that the others do not know about them. …They have not started to cooperate and they do not think about the aim of their post and their placement. They are still at the stage of their self, ego. They care for their chair, their desk, their phone calls and after all these things they sit with the children. However, the children exist, they are there in front of their eyes but they consider them standing at a different level, at a different floor, under basement. They could not manage to get to the surface where the psychologist stand.”

Parents of the children with special needs do not cooperate with him and they do not come in touch.

“First of all they parents) do not come to meet me. They live miles away because the school accepts children from a vast area. Both children and parents are of low level, they (parents) also have problems and they do not care. They say “I send the kid to the experts they should solve the problem”.

After working as a special school teacher for many years he became a vice head and he tried to make some changes but the colleagues were not so eager. The school had money problems and   there were many obstacles that did not allow the school to flourish. When he realized that he could not offer as a vice head he decided to go back at his class to help  at least the ones he could, the children of his own class. He realized that he could not affect the working environment.

“when I was a vice head I was anxious how things will improve but I did not find the partners and assistants I would like. Neither from the county nor the Association of parents because there were different interests involved. The school does not have any money …to make changes and the teachers are not in the mood…. I wanted to make some things with different ways .I wanted to do things. Since I saw that I could not do things and I was not satisfied and I had to leave. I said to myself: “Since I can not do anything from the post of vice-head, I should go back to the   school class where I can   help the children of my class   as much as I can.”

Teaching at a special school is a lonely and quite difficult job because it is self exploring and you should always be in alert. Education means change and the teacher is the initiator of change for the children but when this does not happen the teacher blames himself. So when he was not successful at his teaching he blamed himself and not the children as it usually happens with mainstream teachers.

“You have to change yourself everyday, you can not do otherwise. In order to teach just a simple thing to a kid you need to present it with   different, million   ways. When you come here   you only   offer because the special children only take they do not give… you have to be in mood all the tim. Do you endure to work so intensively? And where can you find the patience? At a special school you can not escape …because all the time you have to stay with the kid and you have to change him…and I was biting myself that I should definitely change him next hour, next day, next year to change him and develop him and socialize him. When you fail to do this you became sad and you are asking yourself “ what did I miss to do with   him?”

He feels that special teaching does something to him and he adopts the traits and characteristics of the children he work with.

“I was sensitive, unfortunatel…, I was always available with children, I was always in mood   with children. I got sick and tired…Now, I myself became an autistic. I follow   the same timetable   8:30-13:30, my route is the same. I come here I get out I go home and again and again…I need changes. The fact that I stayed at this school for many years harmed me and my health and… there is no support and acknowledgement form anybody. I advise one not to work many years with these children and not to get connected to them. You should know that one time you will pay for this and now I pay …For this reason I would like to leave classroom and work on the development of pedagogical programmes and books”

Leo

Leo as a special education class teacher faced many problems with the function of the special education class at both schools. Parents did not want to send their children to this class. In addition to this, many colleagues were jealous of the money bonus and he decided that he would like to be at a special school where all the teachers are the equal and take the money bonus.

“We had problems there, generally with the structure of this class, namely its policy and the whole rationale that underpins it. When parents listened to the words “special class”, they could not accept it and they turned away (they left), they did not allow their kid to go to special class. They did not even want to discuss it. They said: “I do not want my kid to be mocked by the others and…. they call him stupid”.. I was sick and tired to chase and persuade the parents (stressed) that if their children attend special class they will benefit more.. I do not care any more. I did not want to go to a special class again anymore…I would go to a special school where parents accept the problem of their kid and special education teachers are paid the same…”.

He moved to the School for the Blind. The first yea it was awful. He taught at the pre-level class and he felt that he was quite shocked by the experience. Confrontations from children difficult to control diminished his sense of efficacy.

“The first year I did not have good experiences because I taught to the pre-level, it was a terrible class. This class made me feel that “I do not want to come here again because I will end up in a psychiatric clinic”. Terrible children. You can not imagine. I felt that I was the tamer of beasts when I was in the classroom. I could not offer educational work, I could not do anything … all the time I was trying to keep the one kid in my hands so that he would not attack the other. They threw things they were standing on the desks, they jumped, spitted to each other. The one was able to kill the other children. They were destroying things, they were standing on the piano, they broke things. You can not imagine what they were doing. And I was teaching this class all the day, all the hours. I suffered,   . I should always   stay standing and watch the one and the other and keep an eye on   what they do… They came in front of you and they spat on my face. They drove  me crazy.”

Leo was much disappointed by significant others who were his superiors in the hierarchy He was disappointed by the head of a special school because he made comments on him all the time. He was also disappointed by the Consultant because he did not try to help him. He feels that there is no shared technical culture. There is isolation form consultants which lead him to make his own decisions about his classroom and ultimately he himself to calculate his own professional competence.

 “the consultant is a bureaucratic not a real consultant   because when I needed his help he told me that “you are a special teacher, cut your head and find the answer on your own”   and he is supposed to advise us. What do consultants do? …they move the issue to someone else they throw the ball to somewhere else. So you ignore him and work as you think that it is better…”.

His disappointment by the significant others and the loss of rewards about teaching, the loss of control in the classroom made him feel more like a civil servant.

 “Teachers are not missionaries they   do their job, they   check in and check out job and they are paid for what they offer and they do not do nothing more than what the programme of Ministry says. This is what I had promised to myself. Because when I did more things than the usual I had problems. For this reason I follow the quidelines of the Curriculum and nothing more. ...”

Now he has some health problems and he would like to go to a School for children with mild difficulties because he can not teach difficult children. He is experiencing a depersonalized detachment of the job rather than an immediate involvement in the job.

“I am tired with difficult cases and I can not stand it any more, I do not have the courage, guts, stamina, the strength because I have a health problem and I can not get tired emotionally and bodily any more. Sometimes I get angry easily and I lose my temper and I may overreact sometimes I caught myself that I can not control myself either because I got tired or because they broke my nerves and I lose my patience”

CONCLUSIONS

Special education teachers in Greece is not a homogeneous group of people. They have diverse experiences because they follow different routes and work in various contexts. Teachers who work at a special school seem to be quite autonomous concerning the Curriculum but they face difficulties with the children with severe special needs. Teachers who work at a Special Education Class seem to have problems in cooperation with mainstream teachers and parents.

When Special Education teachers enter the field  they are quite passionate with their work and much concerned about the micro level of their school. As years go by,   they view educational issues at a macro level and either they  try to go up the hierarchy ladder  or they go on teaching   at the same or different school. Special education teaching seems to be quite difficult job which affects teachers emotionally and make them quite vulnerable. The fact that special education teachers used to be mainstream teachers and have the option to return back in mainstream teaching is an alternative for the ones that feel burned out.

REFERENCES

Atkinson, R. (1998) The Life Story Interview. London: Sage.

Barbas, G. (1983) Special Education: after the “chaos” what? Because Difference is a Right, 1, pp 30-37.

Biott, C. (1991) Semi-detached teachers: building support and advisory relationships in classrooms. London: Falmer.

Charami, P., Koukou, N., Psagaraki, P, Margariti-Gerou, K (1998) The education of teachers and the school failure. Ekpaideftiki Koinotita, 47,pp.25-30.

Efstathiou, M. (1997) Without perspectives the new Law for the Special Education. Antitetradia tis Ekpaideusis,46,pp.72-73.

Floratou, M.M. (1994)Special classes. Antitetradia tis Ekpaidefsis, 29, pp.43-44.

Goodson, I. & Sikes, P. (2001) Life History: Research in Education Settings. London: Open University Press.

Harris, S. (1999) Careers Education: contesting policy and practice. London: Paul Chapman.

Kalantzis, K. (1976) The problem of disabled children and teenagers and its confrontation. Athens.

Kitsaras, G. (1994) The legal and moral approach of the education of special children. In: Kaila, M, Polemikou, N., Filippou, G. (eds) People with Special Needs. Athens: Ellinika Grammata

Nikodimos,S.(1995) Education of children with special needs in Greece: contemporary and approaches future perspectives. In: Kaila,M., Polemikos,N.,Filippou, G. (1995) People with Special Needs. Athens: Ellinika Grammata.

Patsalis, C.(1994) Integration of children with special needs in Mainstream primary schools. Educational Community,26,pp22-23.

Plummer, K. (1983) Documents of life: an introduction to the problems and literature of humanistic method. London: George Allen & Unwinn.

Sikes, P., Measor, L. & woods, P. (1985) Teachers’ careers: crises and continuities. Lewes: Falmer.

Spetsiotis,G., Mavronas, D. & Oikonomou, B. (1999) Analytic Programme of Special Education. School and House,412, 1, pp.119-120.

Stasinos, D.P. (1991) The Special Education in Greece. Athens: Gutenberg.

Strauus, A. & Corbin, J. (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.

Strauus, A.L. (1987) Qualitative Analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Xanthopoulos, X, & Sakkas, B.(1997) Special Classes. Antitetradia tis Ekpaidefsis, 46,pp.70-71.

Zoniou-Sideri,A. (1998) Educational policy and inclusion of children with moving difficulties mainstream schooling: questions-prerequisites-perspectives. In E.Taffa (eds Inclusion of children with and without learning and behavioral difficulties. Athens: Ellinika Grammata.

Zoniou-Sideri,A. (1996) People with motor difficulties and their education. Athens: Ellinika Gramata

home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact