This qualitative study explores the connection of dis/ability and dispositions in teacher education. Although dispositions have been part of contemporary teacher education discourse for over thirty years, their continued ambiguity is a source of debate and contestation (e.g., Diez, 2007; Katz & Rath, 1985; Osguthorpe, 2013; Warren, 2018). Existing literature examining dispositions and dis/ability focuses on the dispositions and attitudes teachers have and/or need to teach students with disabilities (e.g., Campbell et. al., 2003; Castello & Boyle, 2013; De Boer et. al., 2011; Killoran et. al., 2014; McCray & McHatton, 2011; Mueller & Hindin, 2011; Taylor & Ringlaben, 2012; Woodcock, 2013; Woolfson & Brady, 2009). This study focuses on how teacher educators employ dispositions in their interactions with disabled teacher candidates.
This study used a Comparative Case Study (CCS) framework for the research design that included eight semi-structured interviews with teacher education faculty, document analysis of dispositions artifacts, and autoethnography (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017). It traces the layers of influence that dispositions assessments have in teacher education. Findings from this study suggest that dis/ability is not considered as an aspect of diversity in teacher education. Teacher educators have varied views on the definition, use, and purpose of dispositions in their programs; however, dispositions illuminate the qualities of the normative teacher, which then is employed to determine who should become a teacher. When teacher candidates’ body-minds do not fit the norm as imagined by their instructors, dispositions are operationalized to cast doubt upon these teacher candidates’ abilities.
","abstract_html":"<p>This qualitative study explores the connection of dis/ability and dispositions in teacher education. Although dispositions have been part of contemporary teacher education discourse for over thirty years, their continued ambiguity is a source of debate and contestation (e.g., Diez, 2007; Katz & Rath, 1985; Osguthorpe, 2013; Warren, 2018). Existing literature examining dispositions and dis/ability focuses on the dispositions and attitudes teachers have and/or need to teach students with disabilities (e.g., Campbell et. al., 2003; Castello & Boyle, 2013; De Boer et. al., 2011; Killoran et. al., 2014; McCray & McHatton, 2011; Mueller & Hindin, 2011; Taylor & Ringlaben, 2012; Woodcock, 2013; Woolfson & Brady, 2009). This study focuses on how teacher educators employ dispositions in their interactions with disabled teacher candidates.</p> <p> This study used a Comparative Case Study (CCS) framework for the research design that included eight semi-structured interviews with teacher education faculty, document analysis of dispositions artifacts, and autoethnography (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017). It traces the layers of influence that dispositions assessments have in teacher education. Findings from this study suggest that dis/ability is not considered as an aspect of diversity in teacher education. Teacher educators have varied views on the definition, use, and purpose of dispositions in their programs; however, dispositions illuminate the qualities of the normative teacher, which then is employed to determine who should become a teacher. When teacher candidates’ body-minds do not fit the norm as imagined by their instructors, dispositions are operationalized to cast doubt upon these teacher candidates’ abilities.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Roquemore, Katie"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Cultural Foundations of Education","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Alan Foley"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2020,"date_issued":"2020-08-23T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2020-08-23T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:55:57Z","subjects":["dispositions","pre-service teachers","teacher education","Education"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://surface.syr.edu/etd/1264","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Alan Foley"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Roquemore, Katie"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Cultural Foundations of Education"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["dispositions","pre-service teachers","teacher education","Education"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://surface.syr.edu/etd/1264"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This qualitative study explores the connection of dis/ability and dispositions in teacher education. Although dispositions have been part of contemporary teacher education discourse for over thirty years, their continued ambiguity is a source of debate and contestation (e.g., Diez, 2007; Katz & Rath, 1985; Osguthorpe, 2013; Warren, 2018). Existing literature examining dispositions and dis/ability focuses on the dispositions and attitudes teachers have and/or need to teach students with disabilities (e.g., Campbell et. al., 2003; Castello & Boyle, 2013; De Boer et. al., 2011; Killoran et. al., 2014; McCray & McHatton, 2011; Mueller & Hindin, 2011; Taylor & Ringlaben, 2012; Woodcock, 2013; Woolfson & Brady, 2009). This study focuses on how teacher educators employ dispositions in their interactions with disabled teacher candidates.
This study used a Comparative Case Study (CCS) framework for the research design that included eight semi-structured interviews with teacher education faculty, document analysis of dispositions artifacts, and autoethnography (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017). It traces the layers of influence that dispositions assessments have in teacher education. Findings from this study suggest that dis/ability is not considered as an aspect of diversity in teacher education. Teacher educators have varied views on the definition, use, and purpose of dispositions in their programs; however, dispositions illuminate the qualities of the normative teacher, which then is employed to determine who should become a teacher. When teacher candidates’ body-minds do not fit the norm as imagined by their instructors, dispositions are operationalized to cast doubt upon these teacher candidates’ abilities.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Dispositions and Dis/ability in Teacher Education: Teacher Educator Perspectives"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Alan Foley"],"dc:creator":["Roquemore, Katie"],"dc:description.abstract":["This qualitative study explores the connection of dis/ability and dispositions in teacher education. Although dispositions have been part of contemporary teacher education discourse for over thirty years, their continued ambiguity is a source of debate and contestation (e.g., Diez, 2007; Katz & Rath, 1985; Osguthorpe, 2013; Warren, 2018). Existing literature examining dispositions and dis/ability focuses on the dispositions and attitudes teachers have and/or need to teach students with disabilities (e.g., Campbell et. al., 2003; Castello & Boyle, 2013; De Boer et. al., 2011; Killoran et. al., 2014; McCray & McHatton, 2011; Mueller & Hindin, 2011; Taylor & Ringlaben, 2012; Woodcock, 2013; Woolfson & Brady, 2009). This study focuses on how teacher educators employ dispositions in their interactions with disabled teacher candidates.
This study used a Comparative Case Study (CCS) framework for the research design that included eight semi-structured interviews with teacher education faculty, document analysis of dispositions artifacts, and autoethnography (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017). It traces the layers of influence that dispositions assessments have in teacher education. Findings from this study suggest that dis/ability is not considered as an aspect of diversity in teacher education. Teacher educators have varied views on the definition, use, and purpose of dispositions in their programs; however, dispositions illuminate the qualities of the normative teacher, which then is employed to determine who should become a teacher. When teacher candidates’ body-minds do not fit the norm as imagined by their instructors, dispositions are operationalized to cast doubt upon these teacher candidates’ abilities.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://surface.syr.edu/etd/1264"],"dc:subject":["dispositions","pre-service teachers","teacher education","Education"],"dc:title":["Dispositions and Dis/ability in Teacher Education: Teacher Educator Perspectives"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Cultural Foundations of Education"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:55:57Z"}