Special Education Students’ Expectations for In-Person Instruction at a Rural-Serving Institution: A Pre-Post Pandemic Comparison
Long after we expected in-person classes to return to pre-pandemic conditions, we (3 faculty members and an undergraduate student) continued to note anecdotal differences in how students approached learning following campus closures due to COVID-19. The aim of this study was to determine whether our perceptions were valid by analyzing the content of 552 undergraduate students’ written responses to prompts about their expectations for teaching and learning. The first author collected the data on the first day of face-to-face special education teacher preparation and related courses between 2016 and 2023 at a land-grant university in Appalachia. Using a manifest qualitative content analysis approach, we first unitized these responses into 1,670 discrete semantic units. Next, we developed a coding system that resulted in labeling four mutually exclusive categories of responses related to student engagement, learning outcomes, work-life balance, and instructor support. Following qualitative descriptions of these categories and subcategories, we conducted quantitative comparisons of patterns of pre- and post-pandemic responding. Results revealed significant changes in student priorities, with greater emphasis on passive engagement, personal growth, and professional knowledge alongside a reduced focus on academic effort and grades. Notably, expectations for personal support from instructors increased significantly. We discuss the implications of these findings for rural institutions and instructors.
Authors
- Chloe Powers
- Alexandra Hollo (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9049-0194)
- Kim Floyd (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9572-1403)
- Colleen Wood-Fields
Institutions
- West Virginia University (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Rural Special Education Quarterly
- Published
- 2026-07-23
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1177/87568705261465610
- Primary Topic
- Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00