Combined Credential Programs: Pedagogic, Practical, and Ideological Concerns.

Introduction The number of teacher education programs combining general and special education teacher certification is growing. In spite of this increase, we know relatively little about how these programs impact preservice teachers' (PSTs) developing professional identities. Combined credential programs claim to address the needs of stakeholders in special education--children, parents, and policy makers--and to recognize the increased need for better-trained teachers in both general education and special education (Keefe, Rossi, de Valenzuela, & Howarth, 2000; Utley, 2009). Supporters also suggest that combined programs offer an ideological shift away from the false, but common, distinction between "typical" and "atypical" children. Combined credential programs respond to these concerns by providing PSTs with twice--or nearly twice--the content as people who seek only one credential. They also address concerns by many general educators who feel they are not well prepared to teach students with disabilities (California State University, 2006; Goodlad & Field, 1993; Welch, 1996; Wolery, Brookfield, Huffman, et. al., 1997). Furthermore, they help respond to the ever-present crisis of a lack of special educators in our nations' schools. Graduates that complete a combined credential program will find many more jobs available in special education than in general education classrooms across the nation. In addition to adding skills to a new teacher's repertoire, combined credential programs purport to create the possibility of ideological shifts by those who participate in them. The literature links negative attitudes of general educators (who have not had added training) towards students with disabilities (Lambe & Bones, 2007; Shippen, Crites, Houchins, et al., 2005) to negative student outcomes (Ferguson, 2003; Jussim, 2005; van den Bergh, Denessen, Hornstra, et al., 2010). Those who hope for such an ideological shift believe combined credential programs hold the possibility for bridging the intellectual and pedagogic gap between general and special education (Young, 2010). Combined credential programs have the possibility of addressing a teaching shortage, of increasing teachers' skills, and of changing teachers' views about students with disabilities. This article uses a case study of one newly implemented combined credential program at a large, urban, public university in California to examine how PSTs experience the professional socialization of becoming a general and a special education teacher in relation to their perceptions about disability and typicality. Typicality is a term brought out from interview and observational data. It comes from references to "the typical student" often said by professors and PSTs. Typicality is a norm against which students with disabilities are measured. If disability refers to the social effects of physical, emotional, or mental impairment then typicality refers to the social effects of not having a labeled impairment (Young, 2008a). This study examines societal, institutional, and personal factors that influence PSTs' understandings about general and special education teachers. It examines factors that influence their decisions about what type of teachers they want to become. It also examines the factors that influence their perceptions of disability and typicality. It considers the relationship between socializing agents (such as past experiences, public perception, and the teacher education program itself) in relation to PSTs' desires to become general or special educators. It also relates their professional decisions to the norms and values espoused within this new programmatic framework. Framed within the professional socialization and teacher identity literature, this study delves into the nuances of a combined credential program. These nuances are teased apart through the research questions. Three central questions guide this research: 1. …