Time: Wednesday, 28/Aug/2024: 15:45 - 17:15 Session Chair: Alexandra Jonasson |
Location: Room 112 in ΧΩΔ 02 (Common Teaching Facilities [CTF02]) [Floor 1] Cap: 77 |
Paper
Exploring Teacher Agency in Inclusive Education: A Qualitative Analysis of Justification Styles in Inclusive Education Projects
1Leiden University, Netherlands, The; 2Vrije Universiteit, Netherlands, The
Presenting Author:European student populations are becoming increasingly socioculturally diverse due to globalizing processes (Forghani-Arani et al., 2019). These evolving classroom compositions call for the development of practices that cultivate a sense of belonging for all students (Louie et al., 2022). The notion that teachers play an important role in developing these practices caused an influx of policies calling for teachers to develop as ‘agents of change’ (Pantić & Florian, 2015). The question at hand is what is necessary for teachers to (further) develop their sense of agency over practices that intend to foster the sense of belonging of all students within the educational community.
We adopt an ecological perspective of teacher agency that hinges partly on teachers’ ability to intentionally choose a specific course of action within their environmental options and constraints, and partly on their personal belief system driving their actions (Priestley et al., 2015). Agency is thus a condition that is experienced over something that individuals do, and is “a result from the interplay of individual efforts, available resources, and contextual and structural factors as they come together in particular and, in a sense, always unique situations” (Biesta & Tedder, p. 137). However, how teacher beliefs and personal goals of action interact in relation to agency over inclusive practices is sparingly depicted. Therefore, this study aims to shed light on the following question:
How do teachers justify their inclusive educational practices, and how do these beliefs relate to their sense of agency in implementing these practices?
Teacher beliefs: teacher’s diversity models
Previous work stresses how teacher’s beliefs on education seem closely related to policy discourses and generation effects, and personal experiences have a significant role in shaping teachers’ views on education(Biesta et al., 2015). Thus, contexts play a crucial role in shaping teacher beliefs. It is important to get more insight into how teachers make sense of the concept of inclusive education and how they consolidate this with their personal notion of a just educational practice, as this is a crucial preliminary process for what happens into practice regarding inclusive education. From previous research we know that variations in teacher beliefs regarding educational equity exist among teacher education institutes (Hosseini, 2021; Jenks et al., 2001), between individual teachers (van Vijfeijken et al., 2021) and among evolving inclusive education policies (Kozleski et al., 2014).
Teacher Diversity Models (TDMs) offer a theoretical framework for examining teacher beliefs on inclusive education. TDM’s represent “implicit and explicit systems of ideas, meanings, and practices that suggests how groups should include and accommodate one another and how to best organize a diverse society” (p. 85, Plaut, 2010). This paper adopts the distinction between a conservative, liberal and critical model towards thinking about student diversity as theorized by Jenks et al. (2001). Conservative multiculturalism is characterized by the belief that cultural differences need not play a significant role in academic achievement within the way that schooling and curriculum is currently organized. The liberal multiculturalism model is characterized by the main idea that equal educational opportunities are attained when differences between learners are accepted and celebrated. Critical multiculturalism asserts that knowledge is culturally, historically, and linguistically shaped, taking a critical stance towards the curriculum and organizational aspects of education and seeks for the transformation of elements that impose standards on children that reinforce power relationships and social stratification.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
To explore teacher beliefs on inclusive practices, we studied teachers’ justifications for their inclusive practices through the laddering method (Janssen et al., 2013). Seven Dutch secondary school teachers, recognized as experts in inclusive education, engaged in a laddering interview. Their students’ ages range between twelve to eighteen years old and the subjects they taught varied. All teachers were teaching at urban schools with a culturally diverse student population.
The laddering method is part of Teacher Agency Personal Project Analysis, an ecologically valid way of exploring teacher agency through the consideration of projects as the unit of analysis (Hendriksen et al., under review). TA PPA entailed a three-step procedure: 1) teachers describe three educational practices that they consider to be inclusive (inclusive projects), 2) complete a survey on their sense of agency over these projects using the subscales meaningfulness, manageability, and connectedness (Little & Coulombe, 2015), and 3) engage in a laddering interview. In the last step, teachers were asked why each project was crucial for inclusion. After formulating an answer, the teacher was repeatedly asked why this was important until the highest goal was formulated according to the responding teacher. Thus, the process of laddering enables the visualization of goal system representations (GSRs) (Janssen et al., 2023), elucidating the interconnectedness among inclusive projects and justifications in goals formulated by the teacher. During the interview, the primary researcher documented the GSR for each project.
The data collection involved three types of data: 21 project GSRs, seven surveys on the degree of agency experienced in these pojects, and audio recordings of the laddering interviews. The laddering interviews were transcribed, and the GSRs were digitized. Transcripts were coded deductively through Jenks’ framework of conservative, liberal, and critical multiculturalism. The GSRs were digitized, and the analysis categorized project goals as conservative, liberal, or critical justifications for inclusive practices based on the coded transcripts.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
This study provides new insights into the role of teachers’ justifications in their experienced agency in inclusive education. It does so in an ecologically valid way and reveals important mechanisms influencing teachers’ agency and considerations to be involved with inclusive practices.
Preliminary results show that in most projects, teachers use a mixture of both liberal and critical goals to justify their inclusive educational projects. For example, in Gerard’s (geography teacher) project 'Assignment on migration and culture' we identified liberal justifications, such as "compassion" and "mutual understanding: why do people do this? Understanding each other", but also critical justifications such as "making space for stories from the classroom that the book doesn't accommodate".
Moreover, goals that refer to more general didactical or pedagogical core practices of being a teacher were also frequently present. For example, in the same project, Gerard mentions his pedagogical goal "Identity development of students: allowing them to experience that there is space to confidently take their place in the world". These goals could not be coded as either conservative, liberal, or critical, yet they are important justifications for teachers’ inclusive practices. These expert teachers did not mention any goals that could be labeled as conservative multiculturalism. This implies that for this group of expert teachers, a sense of agency in inclusive practices is linked to either a liberal or critical stance towards multiculturalism.
The empirical analysis of this data allowed for the refinement of Jenks’ primarily theoretical framework of conservative, liberal and critical multiculturalism. Furthermore, and more importantly, these findings hold important implications for teacher development trajectories. Thinking in conservative, liberal, and critical approaches to diversity could help teachers
1) in developing a language to talk about inclusive practices;
2) making them aware of the different ways in which diversity could be addressed;
3) guiding them towards thinking about the possible implications of these approaching styles.
References
Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015). The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 21(6), 624–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325
Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2006). How is agency possible? Towards an ecological understanding of agency as achievement. In Learning lives: Learning, identity, and agency in the life course. Working Paper Five, Exeter: Teaching and Learning Research Programme. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228644383_How_is_agency_possible_Towards_an_ecological_understanding_of_agency-as-achievement
Forghani-Arani, N., Cerna, L., & Bannon, M. (2019). The Lives of Teachers in Diverse Classrooms. In OECD (Issue 198). https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/8c26fee5-en%0Ahttp://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=EDU/WKP(2019)6&docLanguage=En
Hosseini, N. (2021). Beschouwend artikel Kansengelijkheid in het onderwijs: een social justice perspectief voor de leraren¬ opleiding. Tijdschrift Voor Lerarenopleiders, 42(4), 15–25.
Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., & Borko, H. (2023). The indispensable role of the goal construct in understanding and improving teaching practice. Professional Development in Education, 00(00), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2023.2217426
Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., Doyle, W., & Driel, J. Van. (2013). How To Make Innovations Practical. In Teachers College Record (Vol. 115).
Jenks, C., Lee, J. O., & Kanpol, B. (2001). Approaches to Multicultural Education in Preservice Teacher Education: Philosophical Frameworks and Models for Teaching. The Urban Review, 33(2).
Kozleski, E., Artiles, A., & Waitoller, F. (2014). Equity in Inclusive Education: A Cultural Historical Comparative Perspective (pp. 2–30).
Little, B. R., & Coulombe, S. (2015). Personal Projects. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 757–765). International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.26100-X
Louie, N., Berland, L., Roeker, L., Nichols, K., Pacheco, M., & Grant, C. (2022). Toward radical belonging: envisioning antiracist learning communities. Race Ethnicity and Education, 00(00), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2022.2106879
Pantić, N., & Florian, L. (2015). Developing teachers as agents of inclusion and social justice. Education Inquiry, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v6.27311
Plaut, V. C. (2010). Diversity science: Why and how difference makes a difference. Psychological Inquiry, 21(2), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478401003676501
Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher Agency: An Ecological Approach. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
van Vijfeijken, M., Denessen, E., van Schilt-Mol, T., & Scholte, R. H. J. (2021). Equity, Equality, and Need: A Qualitative Study into Teachers’ Professional Trade-Offs in Justifying Their Differentiation Practice. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 9, 236–257. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2021.98017
Paper
Uncovering the Complexity of Teachers’ Inclusive Practices: Dynamics of Addressing the Unique Learning Profile of Each Student in Heterogeneous Classrooms
Department of Education, Faculty of Education, Masaryk University, Czech Republic
Presenting Author:With the growing heterogeneity of student populations in contemporary classrooms across diverse international contexts, inclusive education has emerged as one of the most visible concepts on both the policy and research agenda (Ainscow, 2020). Recently, a broader political framework has emerged promoting inclusion as providing for the educational needs of all learners (“all means all”; UNESCO, 2020). Some authors point out that although there is an increasing emphasis on meeting the individual educational needs of all students in global political discourse, in academic discussions, most attention is still devoted to the needs of only some groups of students, typically those with SEND and/or sociocultural disadvantage (cf. Messiou, 2017; Nilhom & Göransson, 2017). More specifically, even where the authors adhere to the “inclusion for all” approach within the theoretical sections of their studies, in the methodological and empirical parts, the idea of “inclusion for some” tends to predominate (Kielblock & Woodcock, 2023). Therefore, in line with current conceptual discussions, we adhere to a more “broad” definition of inclusive education (cf. Ainscow et al., 2006), specifically to the “C” category of definitions as identified by Göransson & Nilholm (2014), where inclusive education is understood as meeting the social/academic needs of all pupils. We believe that inclusive education can rely on approaches such as differentiated instruction or universal design for learning, which are increasingly recognized as effective pedagogical models in terms of addressing student diversity (Gritful-Freixenet et al., 2020). Such approaches are based on the assumption that diversity among students exists in every group of learners, and students can differ in terms of readiness, interest and/or learning profile ranging from individual learning preferences to diverse family backgrounds (Tomlinson, 2022). Teachers can respond to this complex student diversity by using inclusive practices, i.e. any strategies ensuring that all students who have different individual needs can effectively learn in heterogeneous classrooms (Finkelstein et al., 2019).
Our study is based on several research gaps in international literature. Firstly, emphasis is predominantly placed on teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion rather than their practices. Thus there is a lack of observational data (Finkelstein et al., 2019; Sharma et al., 2021). Secondly, although students are the primary beneficiaries of the (non-)inclusive practices of their teachers, research capturing students’ perspective on inclusion in a broader sense (cf., Subban et al., 2022) as well as students' views on teachers’ (non-)inclusive practices (Schwab et al., 2022) are lacking. Thirdly, research typically focuses on primary education, with fewer studies conducted at the lower-secondary level, where differentiation could be even more challenging for teachers (Stollman et al., 2019; Schwab et al., 2022). To address these research gaps, the aim of our ethnographic research is to explore how lower-secondary school teachers reflect on and implement inclusive practices to address student diversity and to investigate the perspectives of all students on their teachers' inclusive practices.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
In this paper we ask two research questions: 1) In what ways do teachers address and reflect on addressing the individual needs of each student in the classroom? 2) How do individual students perceive their needs being addressed by teachers’ inclusive practices? To answer the research questions, we used an ethnographic methodology, which is characterised by studying what people do and say in everyday contexts while combining various techniques of data collection and putting emphasis on long-term participant observation (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007).
Participants involved in this research are 6 teachers, 42 students, and 2 teaching assistants in two different lower-secondary schools in the Czech Republic pseudonymised as Sunflower School and Tulip School. More specifically, 18 students, 3 teachers, and 1 teaching assistant from 1 classroom at Sunflower School participate in this study, and 24 students, 3 teachers, and 1 teaching assistant from 1 classroom at Tulip School participate in this study.
Data collection spans one school year (September 2023 - June 2024), with weekly gatherings over 40 weeks. Our data corpus comprises: 1) Fieldnotes from 400 hours of school observations, including 240 lessons taught by the 6 teachers and 160 hours of other school activities (such as informal interviews and breaks); 2) 126 interviews with teachers, including 90 reflective interviews about observed lessons, 30 interviews focusing on individual student needs, and 6 semi-structured interviews; 3) 52 student interviews, consisting of 42 individual semi-structured interviews and 10 focus groups.
At the time of writing this conference abstract, we are analysing all the data collected from the first half of the school year, which constitutes approximately half of our data corpus. Analytical procedures are conducted in accordance with the ethnographic design (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007), involving 1) close reading, i.e., detailed and repeated examination of the data; 2) coding, i.e., systematic labeling of data snippets; and 3) theoretical memos, i.e., notes that review and develop the researchers' analytical ideas.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
Our preliminary research findings indicate that each student has a unique profile of learning needs, which manifest in different ways during the learning and teaching process. These student profiles are to some extent stable but also vary situationally depending on factors such as the type of educational activity, the topic under discussion, or the student's level of engagement. Teachers adapt their teaching to these unique student profiles by flexibly switching among various inclusive practices, such as offering choice or supporting peer learning. Based on the triangulation of various data sources, we will present a model that illustrates the relationships between each student's unique profile and the inclusive practices teachers use in response to these specific needs. A significant contribution of this model is that it portrays addressing learning needs through inclusive practices as a dynamic process, thereby revealing the complexity of inclusive teachers' work. Additionally, we uncover students' perspectives on the inclusive practices employed by their teachers.
References
Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1),7-16. DOI:10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587
Ainscow, M., Booth, T., & Dyson, A. (2006). Improving schools, developing inclusion. Routledge.
Finkelstein, S., Sharma, U., & Furlonger, B. (2019). The inclusive practices of classroom teachers: A scoping review and thematic analysis. International
Journal of Inclusive Education, 25(6), 735-762. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1572232
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2014.933545
Griful-Freixenet, J., Struyven, K., Vantieghem, W., & Gheyssens, E. (2020). Exploring the interrelationship between universal design for learning (UDL) and differentiated instruction (DI): A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 29, 100306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100306
Hammersley, M., and P. Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography. Principles in Practice (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Kielblock, S., & Woodcock, S. (2023). Who’s included and Who’s not? An analysis of instruments that measure teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103922
Messiou, K. (2017). Research in the field of inclusive education: Time for a rethink? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(2), 146–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2016.1223184
Nilholm, C., & Göransson, K. (2017). What is meant by inclusion? An analysis of European and North American journal articles with high impact. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 32(3), 437-451. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2017.1295638
Schwab, S., Sharma, U., & Hoffmann, L. (2022). How inclusive are the teaching practices of my German, Maths and English teachers? – psychometric properties of a newly developed scale to assess personalisation and differentiation in teaching practices. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(1), 61-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1629121
Sharma, U., Sokal, L., Wang, M., & Loreman, T. (2021). Measuring the use of inclusive practices among pre-service educators: A multi-national study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 107, 103506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103506
Stollman, S., Meirink, J., Westenberg, M., & van Driel, J. (2019). Teachers’ interactive cognitions of differentiated instruction in a context of student talent development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 138-149. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532211001440
Subban, P., Woodcock, S., Sharma, U., & May, F. (2022). Student experiences of inclusive education in secondary schools: A systematic review of the literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 119, 103853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103853
Tomlinson, C. A. (2022). Everybody’s Classroom: Differentiating for the Shared and Unique Needs of Diverse Students. Washington: Teachers College Press.
UNESCO (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and education. (2020). UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54676/J
Paper
Teaching and learning opportunities in Compulsory school for Pupils with profound Intellectual Disabilities
University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Presenting Author:Students enrolled in the Swedish Compulsory School for Pupils with severe and multiple Intellectual Disabilities typically exhibit significant care needs stemming from their disabilities. Consequently, the educational approach is marked by a synergy of care and learning, fostering close collaboration among educators, guardians, and external experts, including rehabilitation services.
Historically, the content of education for the students has primarily focused on the development of functional skills and ability training. In recent years, with the implementation of the swedish curriculum in 2011, learning and knowledge development have assumed a central role. Internationally, a similar shift from a focus on care to knowledge is occurring, affecting students with intellectual disabilities among others. Nevertheless, there is insufficient research on this field.
The educational form has been criticized for being too care-oriented, as highlighted in a review by the Swedish Schools Inspectorate (2010), where knowledge orientation is presented as positive, while care is described as an indicator of low quality. Östlund (2013) argues that it is problematic to polarize care needs and learning, suggesting that these do not need to be opposing forces. Platine Ewe (2021) also points out the risk that educational relational competence may b,e overshadowed when the care relationship is allowed to dominate, consequently affecting students' learning.
The purpose of the research is to contribute to an enhanced approach towards the students where caregiving and learning are closely intertwined. The research inquiries are:
- How are teaching and learning activities practically implemented for students with profound intellectual disabilities and physical impairments?
- What factors influence instructional time for students?
The theoretical foundation of the study is based on a salutogenic approach, centering around the Sense of Coherence (SOC) theory (Antonovsky, 1991), as the theoretical framework to interpret the results regarding teaching and learning activities.
To identify and analyze external and internal factors influencing the instructional time, Berg's theory of school governance (2003), using the free space model as its foundation, is applied.
The study employs an ethnographic approach, as ethnographic methodology is particularly suitable when examining how something operates in its natural environment (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007). Video observation and participant observation (Fange, 2017) has been used to collect the data. The study participants included school staff and students from grades 1 to 9, divided across five classes.
The analysis of video documentation and field notes involved a thorough examination of collected data. Patterns, behaviors, and themes were identified and thematized to extract meaningful insights.
The results indicate that there are several factors influencing students' instructional time. These factors can be categorized as external or internal influencing factors. The school bus consistently arriving late to school most mornings is an example of an external influencing factor documented in the study. Information exchange among school staff during ongoing lessons is an example of an internal influencing factor within the school's organization, documented on multiple occasions. By providing documentation of various factors that occur and illustrating how these factors reduce students' instructional time, the study aims to raise awareness of the current situation. The insights facilitated by the documentation can set the stage for school staff to enhance the practices. There are also numerous documented instances of teaching sessions characterized by both learning and care for the students. A common feature among these documented teaching sessions was that they were characterized by a high degree of a sense of coherence, where both content and execution were meaningful, comprehensible, and manageable for the students.These documented occurrences can serve as good examples of how caregiving and learning, according to the Sense of Coherence (SOC) theory, can be organized in practice.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
Participatory observation is a widely accepted method when the study applies an ethnographic approach. The method is described as one of the most central to social research and consists of two concurrent actions, namely interaction and observation. Combining interaction and observations in a balanced manner is necessary to collect credible data (Fange, 2017).
Participatory observation can be described as a balancing act between participating and observing, where the balance shifts on different occasions. At times, there is a higher degree of participation, while at other times, there is a greater emphasis on observation. The situation determines what is suitable at any given moment (Alm, 2019).
The purpose of participatory observation is to create a nuanced understanding of human actions and interactions in a specific context by participating in and observing a social setting over an extended period (Klingberg et al., 2021). In ethnographic research, it is essential to generate "thick descriptions," meaning not only describing concrete observations but also understanding the events in their specific context.
To enable the collection of rich data while minimizing the risk of errors, video observation was chosen as the method. Advantages of video observation include the ability to gather large amounts of data over time, with the added benefit of being able to review sequences from the material multiple times afterward. For video observations to function as a favorable data collection method, it is crucial to know in advance what should be observed (Jacobsson & Skansholm, 2022)
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
External factors such as school transportation and the substitute pool lie outside the school's organizational structure but have a significant impact on its operations. In most observed morning lessons , students arrived late in the morning. affecting instructional time. In instances of staff shortages, the substitute pool didn't always have the capacity to provide substitutes, affecting the staff's ability to carry out planned activities during the school day.
Even though external circumstances in the study seem to be part of the school's daily routine, the extent of their impact on students' education becomes a matter of how they are managed.
Creating space for development, therefore, involves discovering and adopting strategies for how staff can effectively handle the aforementioned influencing factors.
There are numerous documented instances of teaching sessions that embody both student learning and care. A prevalent aspect among these documented sessions is the high level of coherence, where both content and delivery are meaningful, understandable, and manageable for the students. These instances serve as valuable examples of how, in accordance with the Sense of Coherence (SOC) theory, the integration of caregiving and learning can be effectively implemented in practice.
References
Antonovsky, A. (1991). Unraveling the mystery of health. Natur och kultur.
Berg, G. (2003). Att förstå skolan. En teori om skolan som institution och skolor som organisationer. Lund: Studentlitteratur
Bryman, A. (2018). Samhällsvetenskapliga metoder upplaga 3. Liber AB. Stockholm.
Fange, K. (2005). Deltagande observation. Liber AB. Stockholm
Hammersley & Atkinson (2007). Etnography: principles in practice. (3:e upplagan). New York: Routledge
Jacobsson, K. & Skanssholm, A. (2022). Handbok i uppsatsskrivande - för utbildningsvetenskap. Studentlitteratur: Lund.
Mesibov, G. B., Shea, V. & Schopler, E. (2007). TEACCH vid autismspektrumstörning hos barn och vuxna. Studentlitteratur.
Plantin Ewe, L. (2021). Relationell pedagogik – vad är det och hur kan det förstås i praktiken? I: J. Wåger & D. Östlund (red.). Hållbart och meningsfullt lärande: Undervisning för elever med intellektuell funktionsnedsättning (37-51). Lund: Studentlitteratur
Widmark, C., Sandahl, C., Piuva, K. & Bergman, D. (2011). Barriers to collaboration between health care, social services and schools. International journal of integrated care, 11(3). DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.653
Östlund, D. (2013). Omsorgsarbete i träningsskolan. IJ. Aspelin (red.), Relationell specialpedagogik i teori och praktik. Kristianstad University Press.