04. Inclusive Education
Paper
Gain and Pain: Teacher Reflections on Listening to Student Experiences of Inclusion
Hanne Kristin Aas, Marit Uthus
NTNU, Norway
Presenting Author: Aas, Hanne Kristin;
Uthus, Marit
Since the 1994 UNESCO conference in Salamanca (1994), inclusive education has been high on the international education agenda. Research in the field has largely focused on theoretical aspects and top-down studies with inclusion defined in advance through state or municipal programs (Chapman & Ainscow, 2021). Because of this, exploring inclusive practices from the bottom up in local contexts is a potentially valuable approach (Chapman & Ainscow, 2021). This kind of school-based research, particularly including the voices of students themselves (Messiou, 2019a), holds promise for development of inclusive practices (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015; Messiou, 2019b). If teachers should systematically and consistently support every child’s right to express themselves and have their views given due weight in all matters affecting them (United Nations, 1989), then teachers must facilitate students’ opportunities to express their voice, have the skills to actively listen to the students, and then act appropriately, according to the students’ views (Lundy, 2007). Messiou (2006) explains that dialogues between teachers and their students are a manifestation of being inclusive, defining such dialogues as ‘reciprocal interactions between participants that lead to authentic engagement with each other’s views, creating new meanings and further questions’ (Messiou, 2019c).
Studies involving the views of students have been largely absent from the literature (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015). Students’ voices can be an important element if teachers are to reflect on how they can be more responsive to learner diversity and improve their inclusive practice (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015; Messiou, 2019b). For this is to be realised, teachers need to develop their ability to and skills for facilitating students expressing their voices, and it must be possible for them to act on the basis of student views (Lundy, 2007). This is not necessarily a straightforward process—according to the theory of ‘cognitive dissonance’ (Festinger, 1957), for instances, teachers might experience discomfort due to a discrepancy between their ideal practices and what they achieve or fail to achieve in their work. According to Treacy and Leavy (2023), however, this is merely an inevitable step in the process of positive teacher change.
In this paper we present a study conducted in a Norwegian public primary school characterised by student diversity in terms of ethnicity, religion, culture, language, family background, and learning needs. The aim of the study was to gain new understanding of teacher experiences with listening to students’ voices regarding inclusion. The participating teachers, together with the researchers, developed a framework for the school’s formal one-on-one teacher-student conversations in which the students were asked to share their experiences of inclusion and exclusion in everyday school life. Data in this study consist of teacher reflections on these conversations. The research question was formulated as follows:
What reflective response do three teachers have about their role and practices after engaging in conversations with students about their experiences of inclusion?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe idea for the study arose from a larger project at the participating school, in which all staff were asked to write about what inclusion meant to them. Analyses showed that the staff emphasised inclusion as a psychological experience (a ‘sense of belonging’) which was further divided into dimensions of 1) a sense of relatedness to peers and teachers, 2) a sense of mastering learning activities, 3) a sense of mattering, and 4) a sense of agency (Uthus & Sivertsen, 2023). Based on this, the researchers and staff together developed a framework for the school’s formal teacher-student conversation (TSC)* consisting of open-ended questions according to the four dimensions. Three teachers and 15 students in 3rd and 7th grade were voluntarily recruited from the participating school. After carrying out and recording five TSCs each, the teachers were asked to listen to the recordings and freely select sequences that supported their recall of their reflections in the situation, additionally inspiring shared reflections on the situation. The teachers then met to reflect, with one researcher attending (three meetings; six hours altogether). To treat the teachers as experts on their own reflections and encourage their development of a shared language (Huberman, 1993), they were asked to freely comment both during and after the listening sequences. The researcher posed open questions or asked for clarifications when needed and offered reflections when any teacher asked for them. Data in this study are transcripts of audio recordings from these meetings.
To analyse the transcriptions, we chose a collective and inductive approach. Firstly, the researchers individually went through the transcripts to identify preliminary themes, then met to share notes with each other. During the analysis of key themes and underlying codes and categories, we kept working individually and met on several occasions to sort and discuss emerging results.
(* In Norway teachers are required by the Education Act (1998, § 3.7) to conduct formal one-on-one teacher-student conversations twice each year, focusing on the student’s well-being and learning in school. Exactly what the conversation should contain is up to each school or municipality to decide.)
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsOur analyses resulted in the following categories: 1) Inclusion experiences in student meetings, 2) Barriers of time and capacity, and 3) Costs of discovering that one’s own practices aren’t in the students' best interests.
The first category highlights the teachers’ reflections on the value their active listening and acknowledging of students' personal experiences have for students, and the teachers’ reflections on how inclusion occurred in the conversations. The second category regards the teachers’ reflections on how increased awareness about the value of such conversations paradoxically burdens them, given the limited time and capacity they have, for listening to their students, addressing students’ challenges, and following up on students’ concerns and wishes. The third category illustrates how the teachers, through the conversations, are confronted with discrepancies between their ideal practices and actual actions. This was often related to the teachers’ accountability to a school system emphasizing academic achievement.
Student voices appears to be a valuable starting point for creating more inclusive practices (Messiou, 2006), encouraging teachers to reflect on how to be more responsive to learner diversity and improve their inclusive practice (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015; Messiou, 2019b). However, the results of this study indicate that listening to students voices also implies challenges essential for teachers to acknowledge and address. The participating teachers experienced the conversations as valuable both for themselves and the students, but also as painful because they gained insights into how practices—both their own as well as the school’s—could potentially harm the students. Some of these insights were within the teachers’ power to act upon; others were not.
Our findings illustrate how experiences of inclusion are intertwined not only with teachers' commitments and practices, but also local school conditions, political influences, and broader educational values.
ReferencesChapman, C., & Ainscow, M. (2021). Educational Equity: Pathways to Success. Routledge.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
Huberman, M. (1993). The model of the independent artisan in teachers' professional relationships.In J. W. Little, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Teachers' Work: Individuals, colleagues and contexts. Teachers College Press.
Lundy, L. (2007). ‘Voice’ is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British educational research journal, 33(6), 927-942.
Messiou, K. (2006). Understanding marginalisation in education: The voice of children. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21(3), 305-318
Messiou, K. (2019a). Collaborative action research: facilitating inclusion in schools. Educational Action Research, 27(2), 197-209.
Messiou, K. (2019b). The missing voices: students as a catalyst for promoting inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7-8), 768-781.
Messiou, K. (2019c). Understanding marginalisation through dialogue: a strategy for promoting the inclusion of all students in schools. Educational Review, 71(3), 306-317.
Messiou, K., & Ainscow, M. (2015). Responding to learner diversity: Student views as a catalyst for powerful teacher development? Teaching and teacher education, 51, 246-255.
Treacy, M., & Leavy, A. (2023). Student voice and its role in creating dissonance: the neglected narrative in teacher professional development. Professional Development in Education, 49(3), 458-477.
UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education.
United Nations (1989). The UN convention on the rights of the child. UN.
Uthus, M., & Sivertsen, K. I. (2023). Samskapt kunnskapsutvikling om inkludering i en mangfoldig skole – med eleven i sentrum. [Co created knowledge development on inclusion in a heterogeneous school - with the student in the center.] I A. B. Emstad (Ed.), Samskapt kunnskapsutvikling i skole og lærerutdanning. Der praksis og forskning møtes [ Co created knowledge development i schools and teacher education. Where practice and research meet.] (pp. 180—199). Universitetsforlaget.
04. Inclusive Education
Paper
Children’s Understanding of Disability and People with Disabilities After the Implementation of Anti-Oppressive Pedagogies
Marina Vasileiadou
University of Cyprus, Cyprus
Presenting Author: Vasileiadou, Marina
Anti-oppressive pedagogies emerged through the discussion of how the field of education, and primarily the curriculum (Armstrong, 1999; Erevelles, 2005) normalizes the oppression of some children, that, based on certain characteristics (e.g. gender, lower socioeconomic status, with minority background, disability) portray the Other in schools (Kumashiro, 2000; Beckett & Buckner, 2012; Beckett, 2015; Symeonidou & Chrysostomou, 2019). Three pedagogical practices (or four, according to the original presentation by Kumashiro, 2000) constitute the anti-oppressive pedagogies. Firstly, education about the other, involves ‘studying the Other and celebrating difference’ (Beckett, 2015, pp.79). Secondly, education that is critical of privileging and othering aims to highlight oppressive practices, while the third pedagogy, education that changes students and society concerns the education where oppresion can be challenged (Beckett, 2015, Symeonidou &; Chrysostomou, 2019).
However, even though sexism and racism are acknowldeged as the underlying cause of oppression against people of different race, social status and/or gender, and efforts are made to minimize them (e.g. Mulvay et al, 2020, Sutton et al, 2023), disablism is far from being realized as a fundamentaly oppressive way of thinking and acting against people with disabilities (Vlachou, 2023) for key holders in schools. Teachers, themselves, report their ignorance on how their practice can oppress people with disabilities (Symeonidou & Chrysostomou, 2019). Thus, the concept of disability in schools continues to be constructed in a negative manner. People with disabilities are presented as tragic persons and passive recipients of charity (Shakespeare, 2007, Skar, 2010). In the rare case that a children’s book on disability is used in school, it usually presents children with disabilities as odd, tragic persons, persons who are marginalized because of their impairment, or as persons that need to be super humans to be accepted (Beckett, Ellison, Barrett & Shah, 2010, Monoyiou & Symeonidou, 2016). To add to this, people with disabilities are deliberately silenced since their narratives and work are absent from the national curriculum and school textbooks.
It has been proposed (Favazza et al, 2022), and documented longidudinally through research, though, that informed teachers applying anti-oppressive pedagogies in their school practice, focusing on people with disabilities as the Other, may change the disabling narrative and promote positive attitudes. For example Ostrosky et al, (2013) and Vasileiadou (2022) utilized children’s literature to make disability positively present in the classroom and minimize stereotypes towards people with disabilities with encouraging results. Further researh is needed, though, in order to understand how the practice of implementing anti-oppressive pedagogies may affect children’s understanding and attitudes towards disability.
Hence, the aim of this study is to explore how the organization of teaching practice based on anti-oppressive pedagogies can influence how children interprete disabilty and/or react towards people with disabilities. Specifically, my research question was:
(a) How children’s understanding of disability and people with disabiities changes, if it does, after in the implementation of anti-oppressive pedagogies?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedA convenience sample was chosen from a public early childhood setting in Cyprus, in which I had easy access. Twenty-three children (4 to 6 years old) from the same class participated in the study. Both the children and their parents were informed about the purpose of the study, the process of data collection, and provided their consent to the study. The children’s anonymity was ensured and their right to withdraw from the study any time they wished was explained. Employing a qualitative approach, I used focus groups, children’s work, and classroom observations to gather qualitative data.
The data collection will be completed in three phases. During the first phase, at the beginning of the school year, children, in groups of four, participated in focus groups to gain insight on how they understand disability and how they view people that are disabled. Children were given pictures portraying human diversity (including disability) and were left alone to interact and observe the material. Then, based on a pre-defined set of questions, I asked children to describe what they saw and what their thoughts were after seeing these pictures. During the last part of the focus groups, children were asked to draw or explain what comes to mind when they hear the word ‘disability’. During focus groups children were video recorded. The same procedure will be replicated during the third phase of the project, at the end of the school year using a different set of pictures. For the second phase (ongoing) whole class activities are organized, based on the education about the other pedagogical practice. Disability is positively presented and/or discussed in the classroom either directly (e.g. watch a children’s story “narrated” by a sign language user), or indirectly (e.g. reading of children’s books where a child with a disability is included, carefully chosen not to promote negative and/or stereotypical representations). Whole class activities are also video recorded.
The transcript from the focus groups and the whole class activities will be analyzed through constant comparative method (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994) in order to make meaning and examine how children understood disability in the absence of anti-oppressive practice and whether and how children changed their views on disability through time in its presence. Children’s work will be compared through time, vertically (for each child) and horizontally (among children).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe study is expected to finish in May. Based on a preliminary analysis of the focus group data, though, it seems that there is an inconsistency between children’s understanding of the term ‘disability’ and their views on people with disabilities. Children, in their vast majority reported that they had never heard the term ‘disability’ before. Consequently, when asked to explain or draw what comes to their mind when they hear this term no coherent pattern emerged. Rather children used typical children’s drawings like hearts, children playing, trees, flowers etc. Nonetheless, their narrative, when presented with a picture portraying a person with a disability tended to be disabling (e.g. narrative of helplessness, narrative of pity and charity towards people with disabilities).Moreover, in accordance with previous research (Vasileiadou, 2022) and some initial examination of the data from the whole class activities organized during the first trimester it is expected that, longitudinally, a positive change will occur. It is expected that children’s targeted participation in practices stemming from anti-oppressive pedagogies, will have a positive impact on how they understand, talk, and react towards disability and people with disabilities.
The findings are expected to add to the discussion on how schools and specifically early childhood education settings can become more inclusive and less oppressive towards people with disabilities. This in return will have implications for curriculum design and teacher education.
ReferencesArmstrong, F. (1999). Inclusion, curriculum and the struggle for space in school. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 3(1), 75-87. doi:10.1080/136031199285200
Beckett, A. E. (2015). Anti-oppressive pedagogy and disability: possibilities and challenges. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 17(1), 76-94. doi:10.1080/15017419.2013.835278
Beckett, A. & Buckner, L. (2012) Promoting Positive Attitudes Towards Disabled People: Definition of, Rationale and Prospects for Anti – Disablist Education, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 33 (6), 873 – 891.
Erevelles, N. (2005). Understanding curriculum as normalizing test: Disability studies meet curriculum theory. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(4), 421-439. doi:10.1080/0022027032000276970
Favazza, P., Ostrosky, M., de Boer, A., & Rademaker, F. (2022). How do we support the peer acceptance of children with disabilities? In M. H. Jones (Ed.), Peer Relationships in Classroom Management: Evidence and Interventions for Teaching (pp. 77-94). Routledge
Kumashiro, K. K. (2000). Toward a theory of anti-oppressive education. Review of educational research, 70(1), 25-53. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170593
Maykut, P., & Morehouse , R. (1994). Beginning Qualitative Research: A Philosophical and Practical Guide. London: The Falmer Press.
Monoyiou, E. & Symeonidou, S. (2016). The Wonderful World of Children’s Books? Negotiating Diversity Through Children’s Literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(6), 588-603.
Mulvey, K. L., Miedema, S. T., Stribing, A., Gilbert, E., & Brian, A. (2020). SKIPing together: A motor competence intervention promotes gender-integrated friendships for young children. Sex Roles, 82, 550-557. doi:10.1007/s11199-019-01079-z
Ostrosky, M.M., Mouzourou, C. & Dorsey, E.A. (2013) Pick a book, any book: Using children’s books to support positive attitudes toward peers with disabilities, Young Exceptional Children, 8(1), 30-43.
Shakespeare, T. (2007). Cultural representation of disabled people: Dustbin for disavowal? Disability and Society, 9(3), 283-299.
Skar, L. (2010) Children’s conceptions of the word “Disabled”: A phenomenographical study, Disability and Society, 25(2), 177-189.
Sutton, D. Kearney, A. & Ashton, K. (2023) Improving educational inclusion for refugee-background learners through appreciation of diversity, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27:6, 671-688, DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2020.1867377
Symeonidou, S., & Chrysostomou, M. (2019). 'I got to see the other side of the coin': Teachers' understandings of disability-focused oppressive and anti-oppressive pedagogies. International Journal of Educational Research, 98, 356-365. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2019.09.012
Vasileiadou, M. (2022) The contribution of inclusive education on children’s friendships in early childhood education [PhD Thesis, University of Cyprus].
Vlachou, A. (2023) (in greek) Introductory note: Issues of inclusive education, In Graham, L. J. (ed.) Inclusive education for the 21st century. Theory, policy and practice, Athens: Pedio.
04. Inclusive Education
Paper
Adolescent Students’ Perceptions of Emotional Support: The Role of Teacher Emotional Support and Student At-Risk
Gunita Gurveer Kaur Mudhar1, Eija Pakarinen1,2, Sigrun K. Ertesvåg1, Maren Stabel Tvedt1
1Norwegian Centre for Learning Environment and Behavioural Research in Education, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway; 2Department of Teacher Education, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland
Presenting Author: Mudhar, Gunita Gurveer Kaur
Student’s perceptions of teaching quality are important for understanding teaching effectiveness, setting research agendas, and fostering positive teacher-student interactions (Kikas & Magi, 2017; Wallace et al., 2016). Despite recognizing the importance of students' perceptions, a significant gap exists in the literature concerning how adolescents, specifically those at-risk perceive teacher emotional support, particularly in both academic and vocational tracks. Given the heightened sensitivity of students at-risk, there is a critical need to investigate how students at-risk status and teacher emotional support influences their perceptions in these educational contexts (Murray & Greenberg, 2001; O’Connor, 2010; Roorda et al., 2011, 2017). This study aims to fill this gap by investigating adolescent students’ perceptions of teacher emotional support and examining the impact of teacher emotional support and students at-risk in both academic and vocational groups.
The study employs the theoretical underpinnings of both the bioecological model of human development and the process-person-context-time model (PPCT), which emphasize the interconnectedness of various systems (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1979, 2006). Delving into the educational context, the Teaching through Interactions framework (Hamre et al., 2013; Hofkens & Pianta, 2022) adapts these principles as it underscores the significance of the classroom as a context where proximal processes, such as teacher-student interactions unfold. Furthermore, the microsystem of the classroom is conceptualized, highlighting that the characteristics of both teacher (i.e., teacher emotional support), and students’ (i.e., at-risk status) play a pivotal role in shaping the quality of teacher-student interactions and students’ perceptions of these interactions (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Pianta et al., 2003).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study utilized data from the initial time-point (T1) of a mixed-methods cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) in upper secondary schools, known as "INTERACT" which examines the impact of a video-based coaching intervention on teacher-student interactions (Ertesvåg et al., 2022). The sample included 1341 students and 98 teachers in Norway from both vocational and academic tracks. Teachers, participating in a web-based survey before randomization of the intervention reported on emotional support provided to students without specific student details. Students, recruited through their respective teachers at the start of the school year, participated in a web-based survey assessing their perceptions of emotional support from their designated "INTERACT" teacher during a regular class lesson. Student recruitment and consent were conducted ethically, approved by the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research with reference number 210803.
Student-perceived emotional support was measured using a revised scale capturing trust, respect, and interest in the teacher-student relationship (Bru et al., 2022; Tvedt et al., in progress). At-risk status was identified through a comprehensive approach involving students reporting an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) during lower secondary school and an achievement score below a 2.6 grade point average (Hoen et al., 2019). Gender was obtained from registered data (0=Male, 1=Female), while SES was measured using parents' highest education levels (1=Compulsory school; 2=Upper secondary education; 3=College or university). Both were used as control variables. Teacher-reported emotional support was measured through a scale assessing individual perceptions of emotional support (Ertesvåg et al., 2011). Teachers' work experience (1-5, 6-10, 11-14, 15+ years) and educational qualification (1-5) were used as control variables.
Given the hierarchical nature of the data, where individual students were nested within classrooms, and the research focus was to investigate differences or similarities between vocational and academic groups, a doubly latent multigroup multilevel structural equation modelling was applied to evaluate the measurement and structural model hypothesizing a positive association between teacher emotional support and student-perceived emotional support, controlling for teacher-related variables at the classroom level, and a negative association between at-risk and student-perceived emotional support, controlling for student-related variables across both academic and vocational groups (Marsh et al., 2009, 2012). Descriptive analyses used IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 29), while Mplus 8.10 (Muthén and Muthén, 1998-2023) was employed for other analyses. Model fit was assessed using various criteria, with cutoff values indicating good fit
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsPreliminary analyses using intraclass coefficient (ICC) to assess the impact of grouping students into vocational or academic tracks on student perceived teacher emotional support showed revealed significant differences between the two groups, underscoring the role of group membership and justification for multilevel modelling (Hox, 2013). Furthermore, preliminary analyses of the measurement model invariance testing indicated that students’ perceptions of teacher emotional support are consistent both within and between classrooms, and across academic and vocational tracks. The optimal fitting model was the configural model, which was freely estimated, ensuring valid comparisons between the two groups (Marsh et al., 2012). Additionally, all standardized factor loadings were statistically significant at p < .001). Finally, preliminary analyses for the structural model revealed that in both vocational and academic groups, students at-risk perceived lower levels of emotional support from their teaching. In the vocatonal group, teacher emotional support did not align with how students perceived their teachers as being emotionally supportive. However, in the academic group, teacher emotional support did align with student perceived emotional support. In conclusion, the study contributes valuable insights into the complex dynamics of teacher-student interactions, with a particular focus on students at-risk in different educational tracks. The findings have implications for educational practices and policy.
ReferencesHamre, B. K., R. C. Pianta, J. T. Downer, J. DeCoster, A. J. Mashburn, S. M. Jones, J. L. Brown, E. Cappella, M. Atkins, and S. E. Rivers. 2013. “Teaching Through Interactions: Testing a Developmental Framework of Teacher Effectiveness in Over 4,000 Classrooms.” The Elementary School Journal 113 (4): 461–487. https://doi.org/10.1086/669616.
Hofkens, T. L., and R. C. Pianta. 2022. “Teacher–Student Relationships, Engagement in School, and Student Outcomes.” In Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, 431–449. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07853-820 .
Ertesvåg, S. K., G. S. Vaaland, and M. K. Lerkkanen. 2022. “Enhancing Upper Secondary students’ Engagement and Learning Through the INTERACT Online, Video-Based Teacher Coaching Intervention: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial and Process Evaluation.” International Journal of Educational Research 114: 102013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijer.2022.102013 .
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.) & R. M. Lerner (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 793–828). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Roorda, D. L., H. M. Y. Koomen, J. L. Spilt, and F. J. Oort. 2011. “The Influence of Affective Teacher– Student Relationships on Students’ School Engagement and Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Approach.” Review of Educational Research 81 (4): 493–529. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 0034654311421793 .
Pianta, R. C., B. K. Hamre, and J. P. Allen. 2012. “Teacher-Student Relationships and Engagement: Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Improving the Capacity of Classroom Interactions.” In Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, 365–386. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-717 .
|
