04. Inclusive Education
Paper
Community Participation in the Redesign of a Modern School Building: The research project for the renovation of José Falcão School
Gonçalo Canto Moniz1, Carolina Coelho2, António Cordeiro3, Luís Alcoforado4, Valentina Gutierrez5
1University of Coimbra, Centre for Social Studies, Department of Architecture; 2University of Coimbra, Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies, Department of Architecture; 3University of Coimbra, Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies, Faculty of Arts and Humanities; 4University of Coimbra, Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences; 5University of Coimbra, Department of Architecture
Presenting Author: Coelho, Carolina
The Portuguese school buildings were built during the 20th century promoted by educational policies based on four main political regimes – monarchy until 1910, republic from 1910 to 1926, dictatorship from 1926 to 1974, and democracy since 1974 (Moniz & Cordeiro, 2019). These regimes used the schools not only to educate the population but also to represent their power relations. In most cases, the students were not the center of the education process, as John Dewey claimed already in 1916 in his book “Education and Democracy”, where students should “learn by doing”.
Beyond some interesting experiences in the 1960s and 1970s, in the late days of the dictatorship and the early days of democracy, school buildings were designed by architects without any interaction with the school community. The governmental institution prepared an architectural brief based on technical and programmatic regulations, and architects developed proposals supported by their contemporary architecture culture – neoclassic, modern, pavilions, brutalist, minimalist, etc. Beautiful school buildings were designed and built, but without the engagement of the school community - although the rector or the school director was involved in some cases (Moniz, 2018).
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the Portuguese government started a programme to renovate secondary school buildings, named Parque Escolar, that worked between 2007 and 2017, where 100 buildings were refurbished. Although the programme aimed for community participation, in most cases that was not possible due to the short time to develop the architectural project and to a lack of participation culture.
Today, the government is transferring the management of the secondary school buildings to the municipalities and an opportunity is created to do things differently, due to the proximity between the municipalities and the schools (Cordeiro et al, 2023). The question is how can the school community be engaged in the redesign of their school buildings and what are the goals that may be achieved with this participation process?
The case of the José Falcão Secondary School, the former Lyceum of Coimbra (Moniz, 2004, 2008; Coelho, 2018a), can offer answers and guidance to achieve a more inclusive education supported by an architectural and pedagogical design process developed with the school community.
The building was designed in 1930 and built in 1936 in the frame of the national competition for modern lyceums, promoted by the dictatorship, in the early years of the so-called New State. The renovation of this school building was not included in the Parque Escolar programme because the teachers were not involved in the decision, and they refused the transformation of the school into a music school – the conservatory of Coimbra. Due to this lack of consensus, the school was excluded from the programme and the renovation is today very urgent and delicate because the building is a national monument, and it has a strong sense of belonging for Coimbra society.
The Municipality of Coimbra understood the exceptional character of this building and started a competition for a research-in-action project opened to universities with research centers in architecture, education and engineering. The University of Coimbra presented a proposal, led by the Department of Architecture, in partnership with the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences and the Department of Civil and Mechanics Engineering, and several research centers.
This paper aims to discuss the proposal submitted by the University of Coimbra and to present the first results of the participatory process that was developed between November 2023 and January 2024.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedDuring the last months, several teams are developing the first phase of the research-in-action project, surveying the school in architectural and engineering terms, to know more about the present physical condition of the building. In parallel, an interdisciplinary team is promoting a participatory process with the school community to engage them in its redesign process.
The team is replicating the methodologies developed previously in two European projects, where concepts, methods and tools were developed and tested to answer these challenges: RMB – Reuse of Modernist Buildings (coordinated by HfM Detmold) (Moniz & Ferreira, 2016) and CoRed – Collaborative Redesign with Schools (coordinated by Newcastle University) (Woolner, 2018). The University of Coimbra was a partner in these projects and members of these teams are now developing the research-in-action project for the renovation of José Falcão Secondary School.
The methodology is focused on the participatory process developed with the school community between December 2023 and January 2024 to build together the functional programme and to rethink the use of the existing school spaces’ according to the experience of its daily users. The research activities are based on the Survey on Student School Spaces methodology (S3S) (Coelho et al, 2022) developed in the CoReD project (https://www.ncl.ac.uk/cored/).
This current process integrates surveys, walkthroughs, workshops, interviews and a school assembly, and involves 500 participants among a community of 1000 members. Specifically, students (aged 12-19), teachers and staff were asked to participate in an online survey about their activities and feelings in the school’s common spaces. This was followed by walkthroughs with the several groups that detailed their feedback. Finally, all the school community was invited to an assembly where conclusions were displayed and programme proposals analysed, to inform the subsequent design process.
Additionally, this was complemented by workshops with former students and with the school council; and by walkthroughs to identify the specificities related to the labs, classrooms, arts and sports areas. Furthermore, the School Direction and the Municipality are also involved as active stakeholders, in a state-of-the-art redesign process that involves all the school community in the refurbishment of a modern school building.
The final programme proposed by the research team is the product of the dialogue between the community voices and the modern building principles, and also the result of conflicts and opportunities mediated by a participatory process that included all the school’s stakeholders.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThis project seeks to renovate a nearly nine-decade-old school, national heritage site, using participatory methods for full school community engagement. Uncommon in a traditionally centralized country, the functional program is defined collaboratively, a departure from previous Municipality or Government-driven decisions lacking input from daily users.
Six workshops and ten walkthroughs conveyed representatives from diverse groups of the educational community, with workshop attendance ranging between 15-20 individuals and walkthroughs hosting around 5-10 participants. The online survey gathered 524 responses (80% students, 17% teachers and 3% staff), followed by four walkthroughs and one workshop, which were conducted for further data clarification. The school assembly, attended by more than 150 participants, facilitated the presentation of the project’s initial conclusions and invited active participation in refining the programme proposal.
In summary, the comprehensive engagement through all the activities fostered a collaborative environment, encouraging diverse stakeholders to contribute to the refinement of the proposed educational program in development. With more than 500 participants, this was a rare time in Portugal when open and participatory work was carried out in the context of the refurbishment of a school facility.
Additionally, this project is taking place at a time when society expects schools to involve all children and youngsters for longer, as an adaptable and sustainable learning environment that doesn't discriminate against anyone (Coelho, 2018b). Thus, the participation of the community, implies the educational spaces to be inclusive, to answer users’ functional and mobility requirements, and to enable the teaching-learning processes according to the current paradigm. This encompasses a profound update of the school’s facilities, the refurbishment of its physical condition, its preservation as a national heritage building, and also its redesign as a contemporary urban, social and educational hub, which the participatory process aims to achieve through the active engagement of all the school community.
References. Coelho, C.; Cordeiro, A.R.; Alcoforado, L.; & Moniz, G.C. (2022). Survey on Student School Spaces: An Inclusive Design Tool for a Better School. Buildings, 12, 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12040392
. Coelho, C. (2018a). In search of modernist adaptability. A systematic approach for discussing the adaptive reuse potential of José Falcão School. Joelho. Journal of Architectural Culture #9. “Reuse of Modernist Buildings: pedagogy and profession”, n. 9, 202-223. ISSN 1647-9548. e-ISSN 1647-8681. Coimbra: e|d|arq - Department of Architecture. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-8681_9_12
. Coelho, C. (2018b). Life within Architecture from Design Process to Space Use. Adaptability in School Buildings Today - A Methodological Approach. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. https://hdl.handle.net/10316/86931
. Cordeiro, A.R.; Coelho, C.; Oliveira, C., et al., (2023). Rede Escolar – 20 anos de Transformação com Fundos Europeus na Região Centro. Lisboa: Direção-Geral dos Estabelecimentos Escolares. ISBN 978-989-33-4659-4. https://www.dgeste.mec.pt/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Rede_Escolar_20_anos_de_Transformacao_com_Fundos_Europeus_na_Regiao_Centro.pdf
. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education.
. Moniz, G.C.; & Ferreira, C. (2016). The school as a city and a city as a school:Future architectural scenarios for the school. In U. Stadler-Altmann (Org.). Lernumgebungen Erziehungswissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf Schulgebäude und Klassenzimmer. (pp. 125-137). Opladen, Berlin, Toronto: Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://shop.budrich.de/produkt/lernumgebungen/?v=35357b9c8fe4
. Moniz, G.C. (2018). Democratic Schools for an Authoritarian Regime: Portuguese Educational and Architectural Experiences in the 1960s. In I. Grosvenor & L. Rosén Rasmussen (Eds.). Making Education: Material School Design and Educational Governance. Educational Governance Research, vol 9. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97019-6_3
. Moniz, G.C. (2008). O Liceu de Coimbra, do Liceu Dr. Júlio Henriques à Escola Secundária José Falcão, Rua Larga, 19. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra. http://www.uc.pt/rualarga/anteriores/19/11
. Moniz, G.C. (2004). O Liceu Moderno – do Programa-tipo ao Liceu-máquina. Arquitectura Moderna Portuguesa 1920-1970. (pp. 68-81). Lisboa: IPPAR.
. Moniz, G. C.; & Cordeiro A.R. (2019). A Educação e a Rede de Equipamentos Escolares no Estado Novo. In J. Brites & L.M. Correia (Eds.) Obras Públicas no Estado Novo. (pp. 225-250).Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra.
. Woolner, P. (2018). Collaborative Re-design: Working with School Communities to Understand and Improve their Learning Environments. In R. A. Ellis, & P. Goodyear (Ed.). Spaces of teaching and learning: Integrating perspectives on research and practice. Springer.
04. Inclusive Education
Paper
Inclusive School Design Oriented Towards the Future and in Response to the Past
Foteini Pasenidou
University of South Australia, Australia
Presenting Author: Pasenidou, Foteini
Although, UNESCO (2019) calls for schools to become “welcoming spaces … where respect and appreciation for the diversity of all students prevail” (pp. 11, 15), educators and educational systems continue to stive to promote all students’ right to presence, participation and achievement in their education. For inclusive education to be realised, an intersectionality of architecture and inclusive education is emerging in the policy context (UNESCO, 2019, 2020), calling “State parties”/governments to take measures for “removing architectural … barriers to mainstream education” (UN, 2016, p. 15). This paper contributes to the emerging field of the role of architecture in supporting the translation of inclusive policy into practice for all students.
Affirming a collective responsibility to promote inclusive education, the Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4) – Education 2030 in the “Incheon Declaration and SDG4 – Education 2030 Framework for Action” established the need for the enactment of inclusive education to be “country-led”, requiring a “whole of government” approach. The Framework for Action was informed by three principles: education as a “fundamental human right and an enabling right”, ensuring equal access to inclusive education “free and compulsory, leaving no one behind”; education as a “public good” and a “shared societal endeavour”; and gender equality ensuring access, completion and empowerment for “girls and boys”, “women and men” (UNESCO, 2016, p. 28). Within the “whole of government” approach, the Framework for Action recognised that governments “will need the support of all stakeholders”, that is, “civil society, teachers and educators, the private sector, communities, families, youth and children” and understanding that they “all have important roles in realizing the right to quality education” (UNESCO, 2016, pp. 28, 60). However, this raises the question of how the right to quality education can be fully realised. According to UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goal 4 (2019) “school infrastructure must be improved, creating safe, accessible spaces” (p. 11). Therefore, allowing the affordances of architecture to emerge, ensuring safety in the architectural design of a school responds to students’ needs, while meeting policy requirements.
Richard Meier (1984) at the 1984 Pritzker Architecture Prize Ceremony described architecture as “vital and enduring because it contains us; it describes space, space we move through, exist in and use” (p. 1). School spaces have been reported in the literature for their role in the education of students with disabilities (Buchner, 2021; Jin et al., 2018), students with English as an additional language (Everatt et al., 2019; Wrench et al., 2018), and all students (Kallio, 2018; Ytterhus & Åmot, 2021). Space has been recommended as one of the resources affecting student learning (OECD, 2013, p. 24) with research providing evidence that school architecture that meets the qualities of being “accessible, suitable and appropriate” is deemed to “benefit all learners” (Ackah-Jnr & Danso, 2019 p. 205). It is now widely accepted globally that inclusive education refers to “an optimum learning environment [that] benefits all students” (Boyle & Anderson, 2020, p. 208). However, this raises the question of what an optimum learning environment for all looks like. Informing the intersectionality of architecture with inclusive education, this case study in a primary school setting in metropolitan South Australia reports on student and educator experiences of ‘suitable’ and ‘designed specifically for children’ material-economic arrangements enabling students’ inclusive education.
The research questions that underpinned the study were:
- What role does architecture play in students’ inclusive education?
- What do school community members perceive to be the enabling and/or challenging arrangements to students’ inclusive education?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study explored the intersectionality of architecture and inclusive education in a single case study of a primary school (students aged 5-12 years) in metropolitan South Australia with implications for schools worldwide. Appreciating cultural and linguistic diversity, the school was selected “on the recognition of attempts to respond to diversity” (Bristol, 2015, p. 817) with a reported diversity of ‘50 different ethnic and cultural groups in the school’ and with ‘approximately 60% of the enrolments’ meeting the English as additional language (EALD) criteria (2019 Annual General Meeting); the school was categorised among the most educationally disadvantaged schools in South Australia. Therefore, implications of this study can inform inclusive practices for the education for all worldwide.
Being committed to a systemic whole school (OECD, 2007; UN, 2006; UNESCO, 2017) and intersectional approach to inclusive education (Migliarini et al., 2019), this study explored the role of architecture as an intersubjective space in a school community. The study employed a qualitative case study participatory co-design approach with its epistemological and ontological premises informed by a practice architectures (PA) lens. Practice architectures (Kemmis et al., 2014) can enable researchers to explore and identify “how some particular sets of sayings (language) come to hang together with a particular set of doings (in activity, or work) and a particular set of relatings (e.g., particular kinds of power relationships or relationships of inclusion or exclusion)” (Mahon et al., 2017, p. 8).
Participants included three parents/carers and 34 educators of the school community including two school leaders, 21 teachers, 9 staff members who did not specify their role, one Education Support Officer and one teacher/numeracy support staff member. Additionally, promoting students’ rightful participation to express their views freely (UN, 2006, 2016) and support “meaningful change” (Dollinger et al., 2021, p. 751), the researcher worked closely with two student cohorts i.e., ten from Reception (aged 5-6) and 21 from Year 4 (aged 9-10) including nine students with disabilities; speech delay, Autism Spectrum, Asperger’s syndrome, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), intellectual disability and arbitrary disorder. Data was collected through; surveys with parents/carers and educators, as well as focus groups and visual participatory co-design methods including auto-photography, digital and hand-made storybooks, and digital construction models using Tinkercad. Data was imported into a qualitative computer software, NVivo. The coding process followed a thematic content analysis combining inductive and deductive approaches (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Nowell et al., 2017).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsInforming ways to promote sustainable changes in students’ inclusive education, one staff member recommended that ‘good quality educational furniture’ would support students’ inclusive education, whereas one of the school leaders identified a future direction towards ‘safe’ and ‘quality furniture’. This school leader identified furniture used in the past as ‘poorly made’ and not ‘sustainable’ as opposed to the new furniture at school, which was ‘well-made’, ‘suitable’ and ‘designed specifically for children’ in line with one of the school’s values stated on the school website: ‘We have established the architecture of the class to provide the best learning environment’.
Prioritising furniture ‘designed specifically for children’ suggests that the furnishing was user-friendly. Having user-appropriate and user-friendly furnishing for all students has been supported as a tenet of inclusive education. Through an intersectional lens, findings affirm that material-economic arrangements ‘suitable’, ‘flexible’, ‘inviting’ and ‘comfortable’ can further enable students’ inclusive education, with their right to ‘safety’ through inclusion of cushions and beanbags being reinforced by students in the current study.
Educators in this study referred to ‘quality’ and ‘sustainability’, terms further supported by the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 on education suggesting the need to support and sustain inclusive practices in the future. The school leader ‘re-imagined all learning areas’ including classroom décor in a collaborative consultation with teachers and architects, all of whom considered what ‘children like[d]’. Such a collaboratively informed approach has the potential for change to be sustainable in the future as an inclusive practice. Sustainability further supports an orientation towards future and in response to the past. Having taught and researched in schools in Central Greece and South Australia, the presenter will discuss findings of this study and their implications for students’ right to access and succeed in safe, inviting, multi-functional and diverse learning environments within global inclusive education initiatives.
ReferencesAckah-Jnr, F. R., & Danso, J. B. (2019). Examining the physical environment of Ghanaian inclusive schools: How accessible, suitable and appropriate is such environment for inclusive education? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(2), 188-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1427808
Boyle, C., & Anderson, J. (2020). The justification for inclusive education in Australia. Prospects, 49, 203-217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09494-x
Buchner, T. (2021). On ‘integration rooms’, tough territories, and ‘places to be’: the ability-space-regimes of three educational settings at Austrian secondary schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1950975
Bristol, L. (2015). Leading-for-inclusion: Transforming action through teacher talk. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(8), 802-820. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.971078
Everatt, J., Fletcher, J., & Fickel, L. (2019). School leaders’ perceptions on reading, writing and mathematics in innovative learning environments. Education 3-13, 47(8), 906-919. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2018.1538256
Jin, J., Yun, J., & Agiovlasitis, S. (2018). Impact of enjoyment on physical activity and health among children with disabilities in schools. Disability and Health Journal, 11(1), 14-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2017.04.004
Kallio, J. M. (2018). Participatory design of classrooms: Infrastructuring education reform in K-12 personalized learning programs. Journal of Learning Spaces, 7(2), 35-49. http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1727
Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education. Springer.
Meier, R. (1984). Laureate, Ceremony Acceptance Speech. The Pritzker Prize Ceremony Speech. https://www.pritzkerprize.com/sites/default/files/inline-files/Richard_Meier_Acceptance_Speech_1984.pdf
Migliarini, V., Stinson, C., & D’Alessio, S. (2019). ‘SENitizing’ migrant children in inclusive settings: Exploring the impact of the Salamanca Statement thinking in Italy and the United States. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7-8), 754-767. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1622804.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1609406917733847
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). Innovative learning environments. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264203488-en
UNESCO. (2016). Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all. http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/education-2030-incheon-framework-for-action-implementation-of-sdg4-2016-en_2.pdf
UNESCO. (2019). Final report: International forum on inclusion and equity in education. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000372651
UNESCO. (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and education: All means all. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718
United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, General comment No. 4 (2016), Article 24: Right to inclusive education, 2 September 2016, CRPD/C/GC/4, available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/57c977e34.html
04. Inclusive Education
Paper
“We do it Together!”: An Interview Study on Using Widgit Online Graphic Symbols to Promote Primary School Accessible Learning Environment
Liselotte Kjellmer, Maria Sundqvist, Shruti Taneja Johansson
University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Presenting Author: Kjellmer, Liselotte
The aim of this study was to increase the knowledge about teachers’ experiences of implementing and using visual support with the graphic symbol program “Widgit Online” (WO) in a Swedish primary school to promote an accessible learning environment. As the overarching theoretical framework the study used inclusive pedagogy, which involves a pedagogical practice that compensates for individual student differences during whole-class teaching and activities (Brennan et al., 2021; Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011). The pedagogical practice should focus on creating rich learning opportunities accessible to all students enabling participation for everyone (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011). Within the Swedish discourse, however, the term employed is "accessible learning environment" instead of "inclusive pedagogy." Essentially, the essence of this concept corresponds with that of inclusive pedagogy. The Swedish National Agency for Special Needs Education and Schools (SpecialPedagogiska SkolMyndigheten; SPSM, 2023b) states that “accessibility encompasses the conditions necessary for all children and students to participate in an inclusive school environment”. According to “The Accessibility Model” developed by SPSM, creating accessible learning environments involves adapting the pedagogical, social, and physical environment to support the learning of all students (SPSM, 2023a). The model is widely referred to in Swedish schools and aligns with the Swedish education act (SFS 2010:800) stating that in education, it is essential to address the diverse needs of students, providing support and stimulation to maximize their development while striving to equalize student differences. Accessible learning environment was therefore used as a second theoretical framework in the current study.
The use of visual supports of different kinds are one way of creating an accessible learning environment in schools. Previous studies have shown that visual supports in the school context may be beneficial to students with disabilities, such as language disorders, autism, ADHD, and intellectual disability (Lequia et al., 2012; McDougal et al., 2022; Van Dijk & Gage, 2019; Wellington & Stackhouse, 2011) as well as second language learners (e.g., Dixon et al., 2020). Importantly, however, visual supports have also demonstrated broad benefits for all students in a classroom setting, contributing to vocabulary development, supporting listening skills, enhancing social communication skills, aiding literacy, and improving higher-order thinking and language skills (Crosskey & Vance, 2011; Gil-Glazer et al., 2019; John & Vance, 2014; Mavrou et al., 2013; Pampoulou & Detheridge, 2007). The notion of using visual supports as part of the everyday pedagogical practice to support the learning of all students in the classroom thus aligns with both the accessible learning environment as well as the inclusion pedagogy theoretical frameworks.
One type of visual support is graphic symbol sets, systematically designed to symbolize all types of words in a language, such as Widgit symbols (Kambouri et al., 2016). Widgit symbols in Swedish schools have become more prevalent with the widespread adoption of the web-based program WO, which also comprises a variety of templates, such as mind-maps and schedules. WO is accessible in many classrooms across Sweden, often with individual teacher access. Widgit symbols and the specific WO program are also available in several countries in Europe and beyond. Yet, there is a paucity in research investigating the implementation and utilization of visual support with graphic symbols and programs such as WO in mainstream classrooms. Through an interview study with nine primary school teachers we thus aimed to explore the following research questions: 1. How do the teachers describe implementation and use of WO as a tool for promoting an accessible learning environment? 2. What impact does use of WO have on the students’ learning, development, and participation, according to the teachers? 3. What important organizational factors are described in implementing and using visual support with WO?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe first and second authors conducted semi-structured interviews with nine early years teachers from a primary school in a mid-sized Swedish municipality, encompassing pre-school class through year 6 as well as school-age educare. Pre-school class for 6-year-olds is part of the Swedish compulsory school. School-age educare is open for students before and after school hours and supplements the school education. The school had a total enrollment of four hundred and eighty students during the study, whereof about 30% had Swedish as a second language. The particular school was a convenience selection as the authors had knowledge of the school’s structured and innovative work with visual support using WO. Specifically, the study focused on early years teachers, involving four from pre-school classes, one from year 1, two from year 2, and two from the school-age educare who consented to participate in the interviews.
To prevent data loss from technical issues, interviews were recorded on two separate digital devices and promptly transferred to a secure digital storage space approved by the University of Gothenburg. The verbatim transcription initially involved using the transcribing function in Word on a secure university platform, followed by careful listening to the recordings and adjusting the transcriptions to accurately reflect the spoken content. Data was organized and coded in the software program NVivo and analyzed using qualitative content analysis.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsPreliminary findings reveal that teachers utilized Widgit Online (WO) in diverse ways to enhance an accessible learning environment, aiding in structuring lessons and activities, organizing materials, reinforcing content, assisting memory, and supporting language and communication development. A significant and innovative aspect was the interactive utilization of WO, where the teacher and students collaboratively generated mind-maps or other visual support structures in real time on a particular theme or concept. Simultaneously, the emerging output was displayed on the classroom screen for collective viewing. Further, teachers noted increased clarity for students, promoting accessibility for all in general and for those with Swedish as a second language or a language disorder in particular. The use of WO also led to increased student independence, active engagement, group cohesion, and heightened participation in teaching activities, according to the teachers. Regarding organizational aspects in implementing and utilizing WO, teachers emphasized the crucial role of school leadership in establishing a clear purpose, offering various training sessions, and allocating time and platforms for collaborative learning among colleagues.
In conclusion, the preliminary findings underscore the flexible and varied use of graphic symbols with WO by early year primary teachers to promote an accessible learning environment, both in the classroom and the school-age educare. The interactive features, such as real-time collaboration on visual support structures, contribute significantly to this goal. The positive outcomes noted by teachers, including increased clarity, enhanced student independence, and heightened participation, emphasize the impact of visual support using WO on creating an inclusive pedagogical approach. Moreover, the recognition of school leadership's pivotal role in providing clear objectives, comprehensive training, and opportunities for collaborative learning highlights the importance of organizational support in ensuring the successful implementation of visual support using the graphic symbol program WO for the benefit of an accessible and inclusive educational environment.
ReferencesCrosskey, L., & Vance, M. (2011). Training teachers to support pupils’ listening in class: An evaluation using pupil questionnaires. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 27(2), 165-182.
Dixon, C., Thomson, J., & Fricke, S. (2020). Evaluation of an explicit vocabulary teaching intervention for children learning English as an additional language in primary school. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 36(2), 91-108.
Florian, L. & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813–828.
Gil-Glazer, Y. A., Walter, O., & Eilam, B. (2019). PhotoLingo—Development and Improvement of Higher-Order Thinking and Language Skills Through Photographs. Journal of Education, 199(1), 45-56.
John, P. S. & Vance, M. (2014). Evaluation of a principled approach to vocabulary learning in mainstream classes. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 30, 255-271.
Kambouri, M., Pampoulou, E., Pieridou, M., & Allen, M. (2016). Science learning and graphic symbols: an exploration of early years teachers’ views and use of graphic symbols when teaching science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(9), 2399-2417.
Lequia, J., Machalicek, W., & Rispoli, M. J. (2012). Effects of activity schedules on challenging behavior exhibited in children with autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6(1), 480-492.
Mavrou, K., Charalampous, E., & Michaelides, M. (2013). Graphic symbols for all: using symbols in developing the ability of questioning in young children. Journal of Assistive Technologies, 7(1), 22-33.
McDougal, E., Tai, C., Stewart, T. M., Booth, J. N., & Rhodes, S. M. (2023). Understanding and supporting attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the primary school classroom: Perspectives of children with ADHD and their teachers. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 53(9), 3406-3421.
Pampoulou, E., & Detheridge, C. (2007). The role of symbols in the mainstream to access literacy. Journal of Assistive Technologies, 1(1), 15-21.
SFS 2010:800. Skollag. https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/skollag-2010800_sfs-2010-800
SPSM. (1 June 2023a). Tillgänglighetsmodellen. https://www.spsm.se/stod-och-rad/skolutveckling/tillganglig-utbildning/tillganglighetsmodell/
SPSM. (27 December 2023b). Tillgänglig utbildning. https://www.spsm.se/stod-och-rad/skolutveckling/tillganglig-utbildning/
Van Dijk, W., & Gage, N. A. (2019). The effectiveness of visual activity schedules for individuals with intellectual disabilities: A meta-analysis. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 44(4), 384-395.
Wellington, W. & Stackhouse, J. (2011). Using visual support for language and learning in children with SLCN: A training programme for teachers and teaching assistants. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 27, 183-201.
|
