Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Teacher educators employ a variety of practice-based approaches, from case learning to field experiences, to provide a supportive environment where special education preservice teachers (PSTs) can practice skills and receive feedback. With mixed-reality simulation (MRS), teacher educators develop a digitally-mediated simulation for PSTs to use high-leverage practices in tightly controlled settings. Evidence supports MRS as a practice-based approach, yet little is known about PSTs’ views of MRS experiences. In this study, we explored PSTs’ (n = 11) perceptions of their MRS experiences in one teacher preparation program through focus groups. We identified three central themes through holistic coding: MRS logistics, planning, preparation; simulator engagement; and MRS experiences’ relevance to future career. A multivariate analysis of variance compared responses to determine how the number of MRS experiences engaged in impacted perceptions of MRS authenticity and relevance. Using these findings, we discuss lessons learned and implications for special education teacher educators and researchers.

Keywords

mixed-reality simulator preservice teachers special education teacher education experiential learning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Accardo

Xin

(2017). Using technology-based simulations to promote teacher candidate parental collaboration and reflective instructional decision making. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4).

Aceves

T. C.

Kennedy

M. J.

(2024). High-leverage practices for students with disabilities (2nd ed.). Council for Exceptional Children and CEEDAR Center.

Allen

A. A.

Stecker

P. M.

(2022). Using mixed-reality simulation in teacher preparation in reading. Intervention in School and Clinic, 59(1), 59–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512221130077

Baer

D. M.

Wolf

M. M.

Risley

T. R.

(1987). Some still‐current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 20(4).

Billingsley

Bettini

(2019). Special education teacher attrition and retention: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 697–744. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319862495

Brown

A. L.

Lee

Collins

(2015). Does student teaching matter? Investigating preservice teachers’ sense of efficacy and preparedness. Teaching Education, 26(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.957666

Brownell

M. T.

Benedict

A. E.

Leko

M. M.

Peyton

Pua

Richards-Tutor

(2019). A continuum of pedagogies for preparing teachers to use high-leverage practices. Remedial and Special Education, 40(6), 338–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518824990

Bruhn

A. L.

Wehby

J. H.

Hasselbring

T. S.

(2020). Data-based decision making for social behavior: Setting a research agenda. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 22(2).

Cohen

Wong

Krishnamachari

Berlin

(2020). Teacher coaching in a simulated environment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(2), 208–231. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373720906217

10.

Collins

Kapur

(2014). Cognitive apprenticeship. In Sawyer

R. K.

(Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 109–127). Cambridge University Press.

11.

Darling-Hammond

(2010). Teacher education and the American future. Journal of Teacher Education Education, 61(1-2), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109348024

12.

DiCamillo

Gradwell

J. M.

(2012). Using simulations to teach middle grades US history in an age of accountability. RMLE Online, 35(7), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2012.11462090

13.

Dieker

Hynes

Hughes

Smith

(2008). Implications of mixed reality and simulation technologies on special education and teacher preparation. Focus on Exceptional Children, 40(6), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.17161/foec.v40i6.6877

14.

Dieker

L. A.

Rodriguez

J. A.

Lignugaris/Kraft

Hynes

M. C.

Hughes

C. E.

(2014). The potential of simulated environments in teacher education: Current and future possibilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(1), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406413512683

15.

Domingo

J. R.

Bradley

E. G.

(2018). Education student perceptions of virtual reality as a learning tool. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(3), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239517736873

16.

Driver

M. K.

Zimmer

(2022). A guide to integrating mixed-reality simulation in initial and advanced special education programs. Journal of Special Education Preparation, 2(1), 48–57. https://doi.org/10.33043/JOSEP.2.1.48-57

17.

Ennis

R. P.

Jolivette

Fredrick

L. D.

Alberto

P. A.

(2013). Using comparison peers as an objective measure of social validity: Recommendations for researchers. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 28(4), 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357612475078

18.

Glesne

(2016). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Pearson.

19.

Harrison

J. R.

Vannest

K. J.

Reynolds

C. R.

(2013). Social acceptability of five screening instruments for social, emotional, and behavioral challenges. Behavioral Disorders, 38(3), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291303800305

20.

Hirsch

S. E.

Griffith

Kelley

M. H.

Carlson

McKown

(2023). Increasing preservice teachers’ knowledge and skills using a mixed-reality simulator: The tale of two studies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 46(3), 204–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064231154028

21.

Horner

R. H.

Carr

E. G.

Halle

McGee

Odom

Wolery

(2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100203

22.

Hudson

M. E.

Voytecki

K. S.

Owens

T. L.

Zhang

(2019). Preservice teacher experiences implementing classroom management practices through mixed-reality simulations. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 38(2), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870519841421

23.

Hudson

M. E.

Voytecki

K. S.

Zhang

, et al. (2018). Mixed-reality teaching experiences improve preservice special education students. Journal for Virtual Worlds Research, 11(2).

24.

Kelley

Qualls

L. W.

Scott

S. N.

Hirsch

S. E.

(2024). Mixed-reality simulation to prepare preservice teachers to use culturally responsive teaching strategies: A pilot study. The Journal of Special Education Technology, 40(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434241262238

25.

Kern

Evans

S. W.

Lewis

T. J.

(2011). Description of an iterative process for intervention development. Education and Treatment of Children, 34(4).

26.

Krach

S. K.

Hanline

M. F.

(2018). Teaching consultation skills using interdepartmental collaboration and supervision with a mixed-reality simulator. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 28(2).

27.

Larson

K. E.

Hirsch

S. E.

McGraw

J. P.

Bradshaw

C. P.

(2020). Preparing preservice teachers to manage behavior problems in the classroom: The feasibility and acceptability of using a mixed-reality simulator. Journal of Special Education Technology, 35(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419836415

28.

Ledford

J. R.

Lane

J. D.

Tate

(2024). Evaluating Single Case Research. In Single Case Research Methodology (pp. 292–306). Routledge.

29.

Lincoln

Y. S.

Guba

E. G.

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.

30.

Martens

B. K.

Witt

J. C.

Elliott

S. N.

Darveaux

D. X.

(1985). Teacher judgments concerning the acceptability of school-based interventions. Professional psychology: Research and practice, 16(2).

31.

Mason-Williams

(2015). Unequal opportunities: A profile of the distribution of special education teachers. Exceptional Children, 81(2), 247–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914551737

32.

Meltzoff

A. N.

Kuhl

P. K.

Movellan

Sejnowski

T. J.

(2009). Foundations for a new science of learning. Science, 325(5938), 284–288. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1175626

33.

Papert

(1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. Basic Books.

34.

Qualls

L. W.

Carlson

Scott

Cunningham

Hirsch

S. E.

(2024). Special Education Teachers’ Preservice Experiences With Mixed-Reality Simulation: A Systematic Review. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 47(2), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064231226255

35.

Qualls

L. W.

Kelley

Hirsch

S. E.

Ura

(2025).

Collaboration in Action: A Comparison of Mixed Reality Simulation and Live Role-Play

. Journal of Special Education Technology. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064211001453

36.

Rogoff

B. E.

Lave

J. E.

(1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Harvard University Press.

37.

Saldaña

(2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage Publications.

38.

Schwartz

I. S.

Baer

(1991). The study of consumer behavior and social validity: An essential partnership for applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(2), 241–244. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1991.24-241

39.

Spear

C. F.

Strickland-Cohen

Romer

Albin

R. W.

(2013). An examination of social validity within single-case research with students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 34(6), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513490809

40.

Vince Garland

K. M.

Holden

Garland

D. P.

(2016). Individualized clinical coaching in the TLE TeachLivE lab: Enhancing fidelity of implementation of system of least prompts among novice teachers of students with autism. Teacher Education and Special Education, 39(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406415600769

41.

Vygotsky

(1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.

42.

Walters

S. M.

Hirsch

S. E.

McKown

Carlson

Allen

A. A.

(2021). Mixed-reality simulation with preservice teacher candidates: A conceptual replication. Teacher Education and Special Education, 44(4), 340–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064211001453

43.

Wenger

(1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.

44.

Wenger

McDermott

R. A.

Snyder

(2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business Press.

45.

Wolf

M. M.

(1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1978.11-203

46.

Zimmer

Driver

McHatton

P. A.

(2020). Performance feedback in teacher preparation: Improving preservice teachers’ use of high leverage practices through mixed-reality simulation. GATEways to Teacher Education. https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/facpubs/4820/

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.07 MB

0.00 MB