Special education administration faces a myriad of challenges in regular times, exacerbated during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This dissertation investigates how special education administrators navigate and resolve problems amid significant institutional constraints and unprecedented global disruptions. The research focuses on the problem-solving strategies employed by nine special education administrators in Northern California during the transition to remote learning due to the pandemic, highlighting the dynamic between institutional frameworks and administrative agency. The legal battles that have shaped special education have led to improved inclusivity and support services, necessitating specialized administrative roles to manage these advances effectively (Winzer, 1993; Yell et al., 1998). Administrators are tasked with interpreting laws, managing individualized education plans, and leading reforms to enhance educational outcomes (Boscardin, 2007; Mayer, 1982; Prillaman & Richardson, 1985).
Employing a qualitative research approach, the study utilized participant observation, extensive field notes, and in-depth interviews to capture the dynamic interactions and decision-making processes among special education administrators. Conducted from November 2020 to June 2021, the research involved approximately 60 hours of observed meetings and 33 hours of formal interviews, providing an in-depth exploration of cognitive and emotional responses during administrative problem-solving sessions.
Central to the study were "change projects" initiated by the administrative teams to address challenges during the pandemic. These projects involved extensive, iterative problem-solving efforts and focused on adapting educational practices to remote learning environments, enhancing accessibility, and ensuring compliance with educational standards under new
operational conditions. The analysis of these projects revealed significant strategic shifts, including the deployment of new technologies and the redesign of service delivery models.
The findings underscore the complex interplay between institutional constraints and administrative agency. Despite rigid institutional structures, administrators demonstrated considerable ingenuity and resilience, navigating through and occasionally circumventing these constraints to foster educational continuity and innovation. The pandemic highlighted the essential roles of these administrators and magnified the need for adept problem-solving capabilities in crisis situations (Bryk et al., 2015; LeMahieu et al., 2017).
The study concluded that while institutional constraints can limit administrative flexibility, they also precipitate innovative responses that can lead to substantial organizational learning and change. Administrative problem-solving during the pandemic underscored the critical need for institutions to support adaptive leadership and to cultivate environments where creative solutions are encouraged and valued.
The conclusions drawn from this research advocate for policy reforms that enhance the autonomy of special education administrators, enabling them to implement adaptive strategies effectively during crises. Moreover, the study contributes to the broader discourse on institutional resilience, suggesting that crisis-induced changes can serve as catalysts for enduring improvements in educational systems.
This dissertation provides a comprehensive analysis of how special education administrators contend with crises within tightly regulated institutional frameworks. The insights from this research highlight the importance of fostering administrative agility and supporting innovation to address the multifaceted challenges faced by special education systems today.
