04. Inclusive Education
Poster
Czech and Finnish Teacher in the Background of Inclusive Education
Veronika Bačová
Technical University of L, Czech Republic
Presenting Author: Bačová, Veronika
The aim of the dissertation is to describe and compare the views and experiences of teachers working with pupils in the complex current conditions of inclusive education in the Czech Republic and Finland. On the basis of the summary of the results of the research part of the thesis, real teacher profiles in the Czech Republic and Finland will be created and compared and these profiles will be interpreted against the background of the complex conditions of education in the Czech Republic and Finland. The final output will be the creation of an empirically based competent primary school teacher in inclusive education conditions. The thesis will also offer recommendations for teacher professionalisation in the Czech environment.
Research questions:
VO1 What professional competencies do teachers in mainstream classrooms consider crucial in ensuring quality teaching in inclusive education?
VO2 How do teachers assess their mastery of professional competencies in the context of inclusive education?
VO3 What teaching concepts/activities in teaching do teachers choose to ensure quality inclusive education?
VO4 What are the real conditions to practice the teaching profession , what other factors influence the teacher's work and what conditions do teachers need for their work?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo achieve the objectives of the thesis, a case study design was chosen because, according to Handel (2008, p. 104), a case study allows "a detailed study of one or a few cases." The case chosen was a primary school teacher in a diverse inclusive education setting. The research sample of participants consisted of a total of 20 participants (10 Czech primary school teachers and 10 Finnish primary school teachers). When selecting the participants themselves, a purposive and purposeful sampling was chosen, following predefined criteria, so that participants with high variability were selected, i.e. with a high telling value that will yield rich data on the phenomenon under study (Novotná, Špaček & Jantulová, 2019): (1) two teachers teaching in a capital city; (2) two teachers teaching in an urban school; (3) two teachers teaching in a faculty school; (4) two teachers teaching in a school with an increased number of pupils with a different mother tongue; (5) two teachers teaching in a school with an increased number of socially excluded pupils. Three main methods of case study were chosen for data collection according to Stake (1995): literature study, observation and interview, due to data triangulation. The final method was comparison in line with the research as a collective case study defined above, which is used in comparative studies. For the initial data analysis, case studies of each case under study were created. Subsequently, the interviews were transcribed. The coded categories were subsequently integrated to produce a description of the phenomena under study. This data complemented the original individual case histories and an ideal profile of the primary school teacher was created, which provided answers to the research questions. The interpretation of the data was based on an emic perspective and is ordered by describing the case one part at a time (Stake, 1995). The final step was the comparison of these profiles between the Czech Republic and Finland with further elaboration - identifying suggestions for improving the work of the Czech teacher and creating an empirically based profile of the primary school teacher in the conditions of inclusive education.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsAs part of the research outputs, an empirically based profile of a competent teacher in the conditions of inclusive education was designed from below, based on the experiences and opinions of the interviewed teachers. This profile corresponds to the European Profile of the Inclusive Teacher. Both build on the importance of values and attitudes, collaboration and professional development of the teacher. In our opinion, the competency framework for student teachers, which is currently being developed at the Ministry of Education in the Czech Republic, should also include requirements related to the expected work of graduates in an inclusive classroom and school environment. However, the emphasis on values and attitudes such as respect, diversity and tolerance in the work of the graduate teacher is absent from the current draft, the importance of the personal component and the development of soft skills is neglected and the emphasis remains on knowledge. In our view, the emerging framework does not yet reflect the results of international research or the recommendations contained in existing professional frameworks or standards, where the emphasis on the development of attitudes and skills associated with teaching in a heterogeneous classroom is already expressed in various ways.
ReferencesHendl, J. (2008). Kvalitativní výzkum: Základy teorie, metody a aplikace. Portál
Novotná, N., Špaček, O., Jantulová, M (Eds.). (2019). Metody výzkumu ve společenských vědách. FHS UK.
Stake R., (1995). Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications.
04. Inclusive Education
Poster
Predictors of Czech Primary School Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Inclusive Education: a Multilevel Model
Jakub Pivarč
J. E. Purkyně University, Czech Republic
Presenting Author: Pivarč, Jakub
One of the most frequent issues in relation to inclusive education (IE) in the research field is the topic of teachers’ attitudes, concerns, self-efficacy, intentions, etc., which reflects the international debate on inclusion. These 'constructs' rightly belong to the focus of researchers’ analytical attention. In particular, teachers’ attitudes have been empirically demonstrated many times to be crucial for the successful implementation of inclusive practices in the context of collaborative learning for diverse learners, as well as in the approach to individualization and differentiation of instruction (e.g., Hellmich et al., 2019; Schwab & Alnahdi, 2023).
The Czech Republic has adopted many measures in the past two decades based on international recommendations and legal judicial decisions (ECtHR, 2007 – the case of D. H. and Others v. the Czech Republic). Czech educators have been inspired by more advanced education systems in other countries that have successfully implemented IE (Norway, Finland, etc.). The idea of IE in the Czech Republic, however, comes into strong confrontation with the domestic tradition of special education. Like other former post-communist countries in Europe, the Czech Republic is still coping with the consequences of the long-term process of fragmentation and institutionalization of pupils with special educational needs (SEN), e.g. early selection and other inequalities in education. Probably the most extensive research to date in the Czech Republic (Pivarč, 2020) which has mapped the perception of IE by teachers and principals of primary schools shows that teachers from Czech primary schools did not declare clearly positive attitudes towards IE.
A number of research studies have shown that teachers’ negative attitudes towards IE can be perceived as an undesirable phenomenon and may represent a significant barrier to the systemic changes in education. Studies show that teachers’ attitudes towards IE are associated with the implementation of inclusive practices in practice, are relatively stable, and may be difficult to change. Some studies point to a significant association between teachers’ self-efficacy, intentions, concerns, readiness, perceived support, or experience with IE, and teachers’ attitudes toward IE (Yada et al., 2022). In particular, behaviour/intent (the conative component) has been cited as a key factor, as well as high level of self-efficacy, which generally predict more positive teacher attitudes towards IE – however, a significant effect of the relationship between these factors has not always been clearly confirmed (Savolainen et al., 2020). Attitudes also tend to be associated with sociocultural and demographic factors. Demographic variables such as gender or age, however, appear to be particularly significant with respect to the type and severity of disabilities of the students that teachers encounter in their practice.
In the Czech research context, there have not been many studies analysing predictors of primary school teachers’ attitudes towards IE using a hierarchical multilevel structural model. The aim of this research was to analyse selected predictors at the individual and school (contextual) level and to find out which have a more significant effect on the attitudes of primary school teachers in relation to IE. Main research question: Do the variables predicting primary school teachers’ attitudes towards IE take into account teachers perceived self-efficacy and intention towards IE, gender and number of years of experience in education (individual level) and the average level of school teachers’ self-efficacy and intention towards IE, the tenure of the school inclusion coordinator and the schools’ experience with IE (school level)?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedA total of 1,434 teachers (Nwomen=1,256; 88%) from a total of 140 regular public primary schools from all 14 regions of the Czech Republic chose to participate in the study (a two-step quota sampling was used). In terms of age structure, teachers in the age category 41–50 years were the most represented in the study (525; 37%). The average declared length of experience of the teachers in education was 21.6 years. The research sample included only public primary schools (special schools were not included) but with different socio-demographic characteristics (e.g. schools with extended foreign language teaching, specialised in sports etc.). Each primary school had a particular number of teachers selected (there were always 5 teachers of a lower primary and 5 teachers of an upper primary school). This research was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the J. E. Purkyně University (Faculty of Education) (no. pf_ujep_11/2023/02).
In this study, the Czech version (Pivarč, 2023) of the 8-item Attitudes Towards Inclusion (ωAIS=0.90), the 7-item Intention to Teach in Inclusive Classroom (ωITICS=0.75) scale (Sharma & Jacobs, 2016), the 18-item Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices (ωTEIP=0.92) questionnaire (Sharma et al., 2012) along with a questionnaire that measures demographic variables of the teachers (age, gender, number of years of experience in education) were used. These instruments achieved high reliability (McDonald’s ω ≥ 0.75). The questionnaires were given to primary school participants in-person via trained interviewers.
Given the characteristics of the data and the research objectives, the analyses were based on two-level structural modelling with fixed and random effects. Multilevel modelling allows separating teacher-level characteristics that differ between teachers and school-level characteristics (which are common to all teachers in a given school). The total raw score of the AIS scale is the dependent cardinal variable that is explained by the first- and second-level predictors.
First, a Null model with no variables is estimated. It is determined whether there are significant differences in attitudes between teachers and schools. The variance at the individual and group level is evaluated by the values of the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Then, Model 1 with individual variables is estimated. At the second level, Model 2 is also extended with school variables (without interactions). Parameter estimation was performed using the maximum likelihood method. The estimated models are compared using the Akaike (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC). The data analysis was conducted using SPSS v26.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe null model included only intercept and random effects for teachers and schools (AIC=4525; BIC=4541). Test results showed that it was not possible to ignore the higher-level hierarchy. ICC values showed that 14% of the total variance was accounted for at the school level (p<0.001). Differences in attitudes towards IE were 86% attributed to individual-level (i.e. teacher-level) predictors.
Model 1 (AIC=4221; BIC=4258) was then tested with individual-level variables (self-efficacy, intention, gender, and number of years of experience in education). Results showed that higher levels of self-efficacy (b=0.146, p=0.03) and intention (b=0.722, p<0.001) positively predicted teachers’ attitudes toward IE. In contrast, females (b=−0.194, p=0.02) had more negative attitudes towards IE compared to males. Number of years of experience in education was not related to attitudes (p>0.05).
Individual and school-level predictors were controlled for in Model 3 (AIC=4197; BIC=4255; ICC=7%). There appeared to be differences between schools. Attitudes towards IE were positively predicted by higher mean scores of schools on the ITICS scale (bintention=0.871, p<0.001). The same was true for schools that had experience of implementing IE (b=0.170, p<0.01). Teacher self-efficacy (b=0.150, p=0.03), intention (b=0.651, p<0.001) and gender (b=-0.187, p=0.03) remained significant predictors.
Overall, the results in this research show that teachers from Czech primary schools declared more neutral (reserved) attitudes on the AIS scale (M=3,72, SD=1,20). There were differences in teachers’ attitudes depending on whether the school where they teach has experience and declares its intention to implement IE. Declared intention to implement IE among individual teachers also emerged as a significant predictor of attitudes towards IE, as did self-efficacy and gender (however, in line with some studies -Yada et al., 2022- the effects of these predictors were rather weaker). A limitation of the research is that even after controlling for predictors, significant differences remained that need to be further analysed.
ReferencesEuropean court of human rights. (2007). Case of D. H. and others v. The Czech Republic (no. 57325/00). Strasbourg. Available from: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22appno%22:[%2257325/00%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-83256%22]}
Hellmich, F., Löper, M., & Görel, G. (2019). The role of primary school teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs for everyday practices in inclusive classrooms – a study on the verification of the ‘Theory of Planned Behaviour’. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 19(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12476
Pivarč, J. (2020). Na cestě k inkluzi: proměny pedagogických procesů ve vzdělávání a jejich pojetí učiteli a zástupci vedení ZŠ [On the path to inclusion: changes in the conception of pedagogical processes in education by primary school teachers and school management]. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, Pedagogická fakulta.
Pivarč, J. (2023). Psychometric analysis of the AIS, ITICS and TEIP questionnaires among teachers in Czech primary schools. The European Conference on Educational Research: The Value of Diversity in Education and Educational Research, Glasgow, Scotland. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8014768
Saloviita, T. (2020). Attitudes of Teachers Towards Inclusive Education in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(2), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1541819
Savolainen, H., Malinen, O., P., & Schwab, S. (2020). Teacher efficacy predicts teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion – a longitudinal cross-lagged analysis. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(9), 958–972. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1752826
Sharma, U., & Jacobs, K. (2016). Predicting in-service educators’ intentions to teach in inclusive classrooms in India and Australia. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55(3), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.12.004
Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, Ch. (2012). Measuring Teacher Efficacy to Implement Inclusive Practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01200.x
Schwab, S. & Alnahdi, G., H. (2023). Does the same teacher’s attitude fit all students? Uncovering student-specific variance of teachers’ attitudes towards all of their students. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2023.2221235
Yada, A., Leskinen, M., Savolainen, H., & Schwab, S. (2022). Meta-analysis of the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes toward inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103521
04. Inclusive Education
Poster
Noise- Cancelling Technology and Autistic Students with Auditory Sensory Difficulties in School; A Scoping Review.
Marte Karoline Herrebrøden, Georgios Marentakis, Anders Dechsling, Anders Johan Nordahl- Hansen
Østfold University College, Norway
Presenting Author: Herrebrøden, Marte Karoline
The main objective of this study is to provide an appropriate theoretical framework for the integration of noise-cancelling technology into everyday school life for autistic students with auditory sensory difficulties. Research in this area is sporadic and lacks integration of research from the traditionally distinct fields of special needs education and noise- cancelling technology (Kulawiak, 2021). This study aims to address this research gap and answer the research question:
‘What is an appropriate theoretical framework for the integration of noise- cancelling technology in the everyday school life of autistic students with auditory sensory difficulties?’
There is a broad international consensus that inclusion in education should be both a guiding principle and an aspirational goal for all students (UNESCO, 1994, 2005). The UN-aligned 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development emphasises the need for a continued global commitment to ensure inclusive and equitable education for all (United Nations, 2023). In addition, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is important to ensure that children with disabilities are not excluded from education because of their disability, that they receive the necessary support within the mainstream education system and that reasonable accommodation is provided (United Nations, 2007). An important contribution to promoting inclusive education is the design of technology-rich learning environments that are flexible and meet the needs of diverse learners, often defined as digital inclusive education (European Commission et al., 2021). Digital inclusive education should consider how digital tools, such as noise- cancelling technology, can benefit marginalised groups from the outset, rather than as an afterthought. (UNESCO, 2021).
Autism is a heterogeneous, lifelong neurodevelopmental condition. Sensory difficulties have recently been added to the diagnostic criteria and are now considered a core feature of the condition (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Atypical sensory experiences can manifest in all modalities, with auditory sensory difficulties reported to be the most common in autistic individuals (Neave- DiToro et al., 2020; O’Connor, 2012; Williams et al., 2021).
As a result, everyday sounds are often perceived as overwhelming, intense, and frightening and can become a source of distress that affects school participation for autistic students (Tyler et al., 2014). Such strong physiological responses lead to reduced concentration, distractibility and increased off-task behaviour, which affects cognition and learning in school (Howe and Stagg, 2016). Studies have shown that autistic students with auditory difficulties are at higher risk of experiencing challenges in school, such as increased stress and anxiety, decreased concentration, learning difficulties, social challenges and general distress (Hall et al., 2016; Howe & Stagg, 2016; Neave- DiToro et al., 2020).
Given these significant challenges and the risk of being excluded or denied equal learning opportunities because of their disability, it is important to focus on how the school environment can be adapted to compensate for the potential challenges that autistic students with auditory difficulties may experience in school. Noise- cancelling technology holds great promise in this context. To reduce potential negative experiences with auditory stimuli, studies (Neave- DiToro, 2020; Pfeiffer et al., 2019) show that the use of noise-cancelling technology is beneficial for autistic students with auditory difficulties in school, helping to reduce auditory distraction and distress and improve their learning potential. Noise-cancelling headphones are often used for this purpose and can be divided into two main categories, passive and active. Both provide basic sound insulation, but in addition active noise- cancelling headphones can often reproduce sound and fade in ambient noise. Both active and passive noise- cancellation do not provide complete noise isolation, but they do attenuate the intensity of sound to some degree (Kulawiak, 2021).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis is a scoping review study that aims to provide an appropriate theoretical framework for the integration of noise-cancelling technology in the everyday school life of autistic students with auditory sensory difficulties. There is a paucity of research in this area, especially research that integrates both special need education and noise- cancelling technology research on autistic students. It is therefore crucial to gain an overview of the research field and to synthesise research from traditionally different fields. This is considered important in its own right, but also to provide a solid basis for ensuring high quality in the crucial decision of designing future studies, and to ground them in well-documented research gaps. In the longer term, gaining knowledge in this field is particularly important as it can contribute to increased awareness and discussion on how to best facilitate for autistic students with auditory difficulties in school, and potentially to more inclusive education in practice.
In this scoping review, the focus will be on five overarching aspects relevant to the research question: (1) autism, (2) noise- cancelling technology, (3) auditory sensory difficulties, (4) school settings, and (5) effects of interventions. A range of databases both general and across different fields, including grey literature will be searched and will be included or excluded on the grounds of set criteria. Both qualitative and quantitative (mainly descriptive statistics) will make up the basis for the analyses. This review will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA framework (Tricco et al., 2018).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe expected outcome of this study is a review of relevant empirical research and the state of the art in integrating the two traditionally disparate research fields of special education and audio technology.
It is expected that this review will provide evidence on a range of conditions that may be relevant to the appropriateness of using noise cancelling technology in schools for autistic students with auditory difficulties. The conditions that are expected to be important include, but may not be limited to, different noise conditions, the type of academic task, individual differences between students and different types of noise-cancelling technology.
In addition, the results are expected to provide evidence about the impact of the use of noise cancelling technology on students in the school, both in terms of academic, social and emotional aspects. In this context, it is important to focus on both possible advantages and disadvantages.
It is also expected that this research will help to identify potential research gaps in the existing research on the integration of noise cancelling technology into the everyday school life of autistic students with auditory difficulties. It will also provide a sound basis for where further research in this area should focus.
The outcome of this research is expected to contribute to increased awareness of the standards of evidence-based practice for good adaptations in the use of noise- cancelling technology in schools for autistic students with auditory difficulties. And what further implications this may have for educational practice and further research.
ReferencesAmerican Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th edition) (DSM-5). Washington, DC: APA.
Hall, A. J., Humphriss, R., Baguley, D. M., Parker, M., & Steer, C. D. (2016). Prevalence and risk factors for reduced sound tolerance (hyperacusis) in children. International Journal of Audiology, 55(3), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027. 2015.1092055
Howe, F.E.J. and Stagg, S.D. (2016). How Sensory Experiences Affect Adolescents with an Autistic Spectrum Condition within the Classroom. J Autism Dev Disord 46, 1656–1668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2693-1
Kulawiak, P. R. (2021). Academic benefits of wearing noise-cancelling headphones during class for typically developing students and students with special needs: A scoping review, Cogent Education, 8: 1957530. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1957530
Neave-DiToro, D., Fuse, A., & Bergen, M. (2021). Knowledge and awareness of ear protection devices for sound sensitivity by individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 52(1), 409-425.https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_LSHSS-19-00119
O'Connor, K. (2012). Auditory processing in autism spectrum disorder: A review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36(2), 836–854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.11.008
Pfeiffer, B., Raee, S. E. & Slugg, L. (2019) Impact of Noise-Attenuating Headphones on Participation in the Home, Community, and School for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder, Physical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics, 39:1, 60-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2018.1496963
Tyler, R.S., Pienkowski, M., Roncancio, E.R., Jun, H.J., Brozoski, T., Dauman, N., Coelho, C.B., Andersson, G., Keiner, A.J., Cacace, A.T., Martin, N., Moore, B.C.J., (2014. A review of hyperacusis and future directions: part I. Definitions and manifestations. Am. J. Audiol. 23 (4), 402–419. https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_AJA14-0010.
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., … Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1994). The Salamanca Statement and framework for action on special needs education. Paris (France): UNESCO.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2005). Guidelines for Inclusion: Ensuring Access to Education for All. Paris (France): UNESCO.
United Nations (UN). Sustainable development goals. [cited 2024 Jan. 26]. Available from: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
United Nations (UN). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. UN; 2007 [cited 2024 Jan. 26]. Available from: https://social.desa.un.org/issues/disability/crpd/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-crpd
Williams, Z. J., Suzman, E., & Woynaroski, T. G. (2021). Prevalence of decreased sound tolerance (hyperacusis) in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A meta-analysis. Ear and Hearing, 42(5), 1137-1150. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001005
04. Inclusive Education
Poster
Co-Creating inclusive school communities
Raisa Ahtiainen1,2, Mihaela Stîngu3, Elena Marin3, Frank Brückel4, Tiina Lindfors1
1University of Helsinki, Finland; 2Tallinn University, Estonia; 3University of Bucharest, Romania; 4Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Presenting Author: Ahtiainen, Raisa
Inclusion constitutes both a guiding principle and a practical approach dedicated to ensuring the participation in education for all individuals, irrespective of their backgrounds or individual characteristics (e.g., culture, religion, gender, ability, SES; Grace & Gravestock, 2008; Göransson & Nilholm, 2014). This as a goal involves active cultivation of an environment that not only embraces but also celebrates diversity, fostering a sense of belonging and equal opportunities for all. Inclusion involves valuing and facilitating the full participation and belonging of everyone in all aspects of the school communities (Cologon, 2019). These kinds of school communities respect their members and provide a safe learning environment for everyone, including the adults working in the school. Further, in these communities everyone can learn and is allowed to express their opinions, raise awareness, and develop their skills.
In a school community, there are not only shared tasks, there are also common goods. When teachers and students are together engaged in an educational community, they can see themselves as members of a collective in a pursuit of educational goods (Westheimer, 2008; Bielaczyc, & Collins, 2013). These goods define the nature of education, and may help to build the identity of the members of the school community. To develop inclusive school communities, teachers and school leaders should persevere with the continuing professional development in order to be able to respond to the needs of all learners (Marin, 2014); their beliefs and practices have to meet the needs of diverse learners in an inclusive school culture. In addition, school communities that value and respect their members and provide a safe learning environment are more likely to be inclusive (Bielaczyc & Collins, 2013).
All the above lays the grounds for an initiative carried out through an Erasmus+ project: Co-Creating Inclusive School Communities (2021-2024). The primary objective of the project is to provide support to educational institutions in fortifying inclusive school communities characterised by the warm reception, respect, valuation, and empowerment of every participant, thereby fostering an environment that embraces and celebrates diversity across cultural, religious, gender, ability, and socio-economic spectrums. Several schools in Europe struggle with establishing equitable opportunities for all learners (Ainscow, et al., 2013). Addressing this issue necessitates the cultivation of an inclusive community where each stakeholder (including teachers, students, parents, school leaders) actively participates and feels responsible for the development of inclusive school cultures, while also receiving support in both individual and collective learning processes. The nexus between the learning environment and social milieu is paramount within such inclusive school communities. Specifically, this project concentrates on the social environment. Through the establishment of inclusive school communities, educational institutions can enhance engagement with internal and external stakeholders, thereby increasing the likelihood of achieving sustainable advancements toward optimal and egalitarian opportunities for all learners.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo support schools in their development towards inclusive school communities the project has developed a Toolbox that helps schools to evaluate their inclusiveness and develop their practices. Through the use of the toolbox, schools are guided to address four fundamental questions: What are the characteristics of inclusive school communities; What are inspiring examples of inclusive school communities? What does it look like in practice?; How inclusive is our school community?; What can we do to strengthen the inclusiveness of our school community?
The project has delivered a comprehensive Toolbox consisting of different elements. The first element is a Conceptual Tool (two conceptual frameworks) whose aim is to outline and discuss the various ways of defining inclusiveness as a key factor of school communities. This tool translates academic insights into conceptualisations that are more approachable for teachers and principals. Further, the Conceptual Tool discusses inclusive school communities from the perspective of a change process and the main phases related to it. The second element is an Inspirational Tool consisting of vignettes capturing a variety of features related to inclusive school communities. The vignettes focus on engagement of all school community members (students, teachers, parents) and collaboration between teachers. The vignettes cover empowering stories regarding the process of inclusion and on how to deal with questions around belonging and social inclusion.
The third element is the Analytical Tool aimed at helping professionals working in schools to evaluate the degree of inclusiveness of their school community and identify needs for development. The tool is based on the concept of inclusive school communities and the means for school development described in the conceptual framework. The analytical tool has been built on the idea of schools as learning communities where collaborative learning processes foster change towards inclusiveness. The tool provides means for evaluating and reflecting key elements of inclusive school communities. Through the evaluation the tool can help teachers and leaders to identify areas for improvement and find next steps
The fourth element consists of creating a Guide to implement the above-mentioned pieces of the toolbox. All the parts of the toolbox presented above have developed by project members from 7
countries (Canada, Estonia, Finland, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Romania, Switzerland) and further analysed and revised during co-creation sessions with pilot schools. All tools are tested for practicality and revised in an iterative process.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe aim with the Toolbox is to strengthen awareness, foster deeper understanding, and create a common conceptual basis for schools to work with. Trying to respond to the needs of the teachers a variety of means (tools) were produced to spread the information regarding a school community based on the principle of inclusion: conceptual frameworks, videos and inspirational examples (vignettes) for teachers and school leaders as examples of what an inclusive school community can look like and how it may function. Moreover, the analytical tool provides means for evaluating and reflecting key elements of inclusive school communities. The analytical tool will help schools to identify areas for improvement and possible next steps for developing towards practices that are (more) inclusive.
Taking into consideration that the project is ongoing, the project’s partners now focus on an overall review and assessment of the relevancy and effectiveness of the toolbox accompanied by an overall user guide. All the different tools will be reviewed and assessed, so schools will find guidance and clarity in the manual on how the different tools together can support implementation and development of inclusive school communities by providing feedback, inspiration and ideas for the next steps.
ReferencesAinscow, M., Dyson, A., Goldrick, S., & West, M. (2013). Developing equitable education systems. Routledge.
Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (2013). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In Instructional-design theories and models (pp. 269-292). Routledge.
Cologon, K. (2019). Towards inclusive education: A necessary process of transformation.
Göransson, K., & Nilholm, C. (2014). Conceptual diversities and empirical shortcomings–a critical analysis of research on inclusive education. European journal of special needs education, 29(3), 265-280.).
Grace, S., & Gravestock, P. (2008). Inclusion and diversity: Meeting the needs of all students. Routledge.
Marin, E. (2016). Teacher education for inclusion-the premises for implementing a new initial teacher training programme. Specialusis ugdymas, 2(35), 9-37.
Strike KA.(1999). Can Schools be Communities? The Tension between Shared Values and Inclusion. Educational Administration Quarterly. 35(1):46-70. doi:10.1177/00131619921968464
Swanson, J. W. (2004). Diversity: creating an environment of inclusiveness. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 28(3), 207-211.
Westheimer, J. (2008). Learning among colleagues: Teacher community and the shared enterprise of education 1. Handbook of research on teacher education, 756-783.
|
