Making Education Inclusive [1 ed.] 9781443883061, 9781443876124

Citation preview

Making Education Inclusive

Making Education Inclusive Edited by

Elizabeth Walton and Sharon Moonsamy

Making Education Inclusive Edited by Elizabeth Walton and Sharon Moonsamy This book first published 2015 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2015 by Elizabeth Walton, Sharon Moonsamy and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-7612-7 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-7612-4



TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Illustrations .................................................................................... vii List of Tables ............................................................................................ viii Foreword .................................................................................................... ix Ruksana Osman Acknowledgements ................................................................................... xii Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Elizabeth Walton Chapter One ............................................................................................... 10 Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion Elizabeth Walton Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 28 Theorising Primary Mathematics Teacher Development in Inclusive Ways Hamsa Venkat Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 41 A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community: Essential Teacher Competencies Sai Väyrynen Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 61 Lessons Learnt from Training Full Service School and Learning Support Educators Jean V. Fourie and Elizabeth Hooijer Chapter Five .............................................................................................. 75 Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy: The Role of Teacher Educators in the Practicum and Beyond Vijaya Dharan



vi

Table of Contents

Chapter Six ................................................................................................ 94 An Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support Model for Limpopo’s Primary Schools (Grade R–3):Preliminary Findings Veronica Moodley Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 113 Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher when Mediating in the Classroom Sharon Moonsamy Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 130 Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility at the University of the Witwatersrand Anne Fitchett Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 147 Parental Perceptions of Disability Jane Mutasa and Nancy Ruhode Conclusion ............................................................................................... 164 Sharon Moonsamy Contributors ............................................................................................. 169 Index ........................................................................................................ 173



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 2.1 Modelling primary mathematics teacher development ............ 36 Figure 7.1 Information processing model ................................................ 116 Figure 8.1 University of the Witwatersrand Education Campus. ............ 134 Figure 8.2 Access to change-room and disabled toilet showing step and narrow lobby. .............................................................................. 139





LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Teacher competencies for inclusion .......................................... 45 Table 7.1 Questions that teachers need to consider at the preparation and planning stages ............................................................................ 118 Table 7.2 Factors that teachers should consider during mediation .......... 120 Table 7.3 Mediated learning criteria ........................................................ 121 Table 7.4 Reflective questions to consider after the lesson ..................... 124





FOREWORD RUKSANA OSMAN

Making education inclusive: ethical and pedagogical imperatives Making education inclusive is a collection of chapters which emerged from papers presented at a biennial symposium of the Southern African Association for Learning and Educational Differences (SAALED) and the UNESCO Chair in Teacher Education for Diversity and Development. The conference was designed to bring together a variety of individuals and organisations with a stake in education and with the intention of making education in diverse conditions inclusive. The format of the conference aligned well with the aims of the UNESCO Chair project. The UNESCO Chair project in collaboration with research partners in Chile and Rwanda has been focussing its attention on building knowledge about diversity and development in teacher education, particularly knowledge generated from the global South about the global South. The collaboration between SAALED and the UNESCO Chair project has produced a unique contribution to the growing body of research on inclusive education and tackles some of the tough issues and questions confronting this area of study and practice. It allowed for Southern Africa to talk back to the world, the continent and the region, about diversity, inclusivity and exclusion. This book addresses the complexity of educational exclusion in a postapartheid and a post-colonial inclusive society. In particular, it contrasts two inter-related but competing concepts of inclusion and exclusion, and engages with this binary by looking at what is exclusionary in education and then proffering thoughts, ideas, insights and pedagogies associated with being inclusionary or inclusive. In many ways this book offers pedagogies of hope, particularly important for a world, a continent and a region where exclusion and inequality are ever present and seem ever widening. Making education inclusive offers us thoughtful understandings of inclusion and exclusion in education, coming out at the right time because



x

Foreword

of the growing interest in inclusion and inclusionary practices. This growth is fuelled by the increasing criticism of tokenism in inclusion and accompanied by significant advances in our knowledge about inclusive philosophies and pedagogies. This book also comes from the right people. Much of the current conceptual, theoretical and practical work on inclusive education has been produced by scholars in northern and western countries, and this work has produced the predominant explanations of (educational) inclusion and exclusion. By way of contrast, the major part of this book comes from emerging scholars in Southern Africa. The accounts from these emerging scholars suggest that some of the well-established theories and ideas from the north and the west do not necessarily address and fit the present day realities of the post-colonial contexts in which they are expected to work. In this book an exploration of inclusive education is conducted by directly addressing the relationships between schooling and higher education, teachers and parents, pedagogies and inclusive values or philosophies. The strength of this book comes from the variety of conceptual and methodological frames of reference and tackles a variety of problem areas across the broad spectrum of learning contexts, i.e., classrooms, university lecture theatres and the like. Such variety offers many opportunities for thinking and acting in ways that are novel and innovative, to produce practical results. This variety is also vital to educational contexts undergoing massive reform (as in South Africa), and navigates tensions and contradictions which always accompany educational reform. Importantly, the variety offered in this collection of papers shows us some of the goals that are achievable for inclusive education and some of the blind spots in inclusive education advocacy and provisioning. Making education inclusive is unusual in that it addresses itself to the question of educational change (through inclusion) and that this change is addressed not just to teachers, but also to parents and students. All of the accounts in this book are relevant not only to South Africa, but also to societies undergoing educational reform; societies trying to find and forge new ways of seeing and being in this world. This book is aimed at teachers, university lecturers, parents, educational policy makers and students. It advances our knowledge not just about teaching in inclusive classrooms, but also about our values and dispositions relating to our ideas about inclusivity and exclusion. The material in this work will be of value to graduate students developing their trajectories in teaching at school or university and to researchers and policy makers with an interest in changing the ethos of schooling and higher education and “dismantling exclusion” systematically. Ultimately, Making education inclusive is a



Making Education Inclusive

xi

strong reminder that inclusivity is not just a pedagogical project, but in the words of Allan (2005) an “ethical project”. Professor Ruksana Osman is Dean of the Faculty of Humanities and UNESCO Chair in Teacher Education for Diversity and Development: University of the Witwatersrand

Reference Allan, J. 2005. Inclusion as an ethical project. In Foucault and the government of disability, ed. S. Tremain, 281–297. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.





ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The editors gratefully acknowledge the following individuals, without whom this book would not have been published: The publishing team at Cambridge Scholars Publishing The chapter authors for their contributions to this book The peer reviewers who reviewed all chapters submitted to the editors: Daleen Alexandra Zaytoon Amod Thomas Barow Vijaya Dharan Anne Fitchett Jean Fourie Elizabeth Hooijer Alfred Masinire Veronica Moodley Anniah Mupawose Reville Nussey Edmarie Pretorius Eileen Raymond Lee Rusznyak Martyn van der Merwe Sai Väyrynen Adri Vorster Books Etc (www.booksetc.co.za) assisted the editors with proofreading. The conference from which these chapters are derived would not have been possible without: The Southern African Association of Educational and Learning Differences (www.saaled.org.za) The UNESCO Chair in Teacher Education for Diversity and Development (http://www.wits.ac.za/academic/humanities/education/research/17639/ unesco_chair.html) The Wits School of Education (http://www.wits.ac.za/Education) The National Research Foundation (http://www.nrf.ac.za/)



INTRODUCTION ELIZABETH WALTON

The Making education inclusive conference in Johannesburg The ideals of inclusive education have been adopted internationally, with many countries giving effect to legislation and policy that would promote access to and participation in education by previously marginalised groups. Despite these policy advances, educational exclusion and marginalisation remains the experience of large numbers of children and young people across the globe. As Kozleski, Artiles and Waitoller (2011, 4) note, “...several key difficulties have emerged” as inclusive education has spread. These difficulties include the impact of cultural and historical contexts on how inclusive education is imagined, and the fissure between policy intent and practice on the ground. Different local realities enable and constrain the realisation of the ideals of inclusive education. Cross-national perspectives on these different iterations and ideations of inclusive education have long been an interest in the field (Alur and Timmons (eds.) 2009; Artiles, Kozleski and Waitoller (eds.) 2011; Booth and Ainscow (eds.) 1998). These accounts are a reminder that inclusive education cannot “...travel seamlessly across cultures and contexts” (Kozleski et al 2011, 8), but they also show that many of the challenges of transforming education to become more inclusive are similar across contexts. South Africa, like many other developing countries, has adopted inclusive education in an effort to build an education system responsive to the needs of all learners. Implementation of inclusive education has been uneven, and efforts are often frustrated by negative attitudes, a narrow focus on special needs, and limited human and infrastructural capacity. Despite this, many teachers are positive about inclusive education and are interested in opportunities to learn to become more inclusive (Walton 2011). One such opportunity is the biennial conference of the Southern African Association for Learning and Educational Differences (SAALED). The challenge to the conference organisers was to offer a space that would

2

Introduction

acknowledge the challenges facing (inclusive) education in South Africa, but contribute positively to the dialogue about what it might mean to educate in ways that include rather than exclude. The UNESCO Chair in Teacher Education for Diversity and Development (based at the Wits School of Education) collaborated with SAALED in conceptualising and arranging the conference, which included both a research and a professional development component. The latter focused more specifically on the knowledge and skills (Florian and Rouse 2010) that teachers are said to need for inclusive teaching. This book is made up of chapters based on a selection of papers presented at the conference, which was titled ‘Making education inclusive’ and was held in Johannesburg in 2013. The call for conference papers was structured according to Slee’s (2011) hierarchy of questions about inclusive education, i.e. first comes the need to recognise and address the exclusionary pressures and practices that are maintained in education and society through unequal societal relations, and second to address the resources and reorganisation that are needed to achieve inclusion. These were simplified into two themes: dismantling exclusion and enabling inclusive education. From these themes, four focus areas were identified by the conference organisers: Identifying and addressing exclusionary pressures, policies and practices in education; the resources and reorganisation of schools required to address educational exclusion; teacher education for social justice, inclusion and diversity; and research-based institutional and classroom strategies to make education inclusive. As a result of this focus, all the conference papers were thematically connected, and those selected for inclusion in this book address concerns in the global quest for greater inclusivity in education1. The majority of the chapters in this volume are written by South Africans, many of whom are emerging academics in the field. This is important, given that the available literature on inclusive education is mostly derived from the Global North. Perspectives from the developing world are valuable, particularly in the light of the challenges of implementing inclusive education in these countries. In countries unable to provide access to quality education for the majority of their children, it can be seen as unrealistic to expect that learners with disabilities could enjoy meaningful academic inclusion. In this argument, inclusive education is seen to represent an imposition on

 1 Editors’ note: Different authors use different terminology, e.g. teachers/educators; pre-service teachers/teacher trainees; learners/students; special needs/barriers to learning; etc, depending on their context and background. The editors have chosen to retain the authors’ preferred terminology, rather than standardise it across this book.

Making Education Inclusive

3

these countries, given colonial histories and the challenges of post-colonial realities (Armstrong, Armstrong and Spandagou 2011). On the other hand, inclusive education can be regarded as the default educational position for some developing countries, particularly where there is inadequate special education provision. Given the communitarian ethos that prevails in some of these contexts, learners with disabilities have been included in education as a matter of course (Kisanji 1998). The addition of perspectives offered by the international authors confirm that the concerns of making education inclusive are global, and that it is important to encourage international conversations with a view to learning from each other and strengthening inclusive education in the respective contexts (Walton 2015). The chapters in this book have been clustered around themes. After the chapter on dismantling exclusion, is a cluster of chapters concerned with teacher development. The next cluster deals with various schoolwide and classroom interventions to promote inclusivity, and the final cluster looks beyond the school gate to the university and to parent attitudes. The concluding chapter makes suggestions for the way forward.

Dismantling exclusion The first chapter of this book (based on the keynote address of the professional development conference) is a consideration of educational exclusion, and how the “empire” of educational exclusion (Slee 2011) can be dismantled. The chapter begins by considering characteristics of empires, and shows how educational exclusion shares many of these characteristics. In the light of South Africa’s former president’s life spent resisting apartheid, the chapter considers what can be learned about activism from Nelson Mandela, and what it takes to resist systemic and pervasive injustice, inequality and exclusion in education. Three suggestions are offered and explored: working against educational exclusion; working around educational exclusion; and working towards access, participation, social justice and inclusion in education for all.

Teacher development for inclusion Inclusive education is not about admitting previously excluded learners into untransformed schools where attitudes, policies and practices prevent these learners from participating, experiencing success and feeling that they belong. Instead, it is about identifying and addressing exclusionary pressures in schools and harnessing the resources needed to provide the support that learners require. Teachers play a crucial role in making

4

Introduction

education inclusive and yet many teachers believe that they are underprepared and ill-equipped for effective teaching in inclusive classrooms (Department of Education (DoE) 2001; Eloff and Kgwete 2007; Forlin 2010; Stofile and Green 2007). It is thus not surprising that a number of chapters in this volume are concerned with what it means to equip teachers to be pedagogically responsive in diverse classrooms. The first of the chapters clustered around this theme is Hamsa Venkat’s chapter which focuses on teaching and learning mathematics. This, I would argue, is an important concern of inclusive education, given that many learners in the South African education system are excluded from learning the mathematical knowledge that they would need for access to learning at higher levels. Teaching and learning of mathematics in primary schools is an area of challenge in South Africa, with many teachers lacking pedagogical content knowledge in mathematics teaching and learners performing poorly in national and international studies (Venkat 2012). Mathematics teacher development is thus vital to enhance epistemological access (Morrow 2007) for learners in schools. In her chapter, Venkat presents details of the contextual rationales for a model for studying primary mathematics teacher development. After providing some background into the challenges of mathematics teaching and the policy landscape, she argues for the development of a model that that operates inclusively with “pedagogic zones of proximal development”. The second chapter in the teacher development cluster is by Sai Väyrynen and concerns teachers and schools in rural northern Finland. In the absence of educational support services, Väyrynen uses educational ethnography in a quest to understand the key competencies of teachers in these small, rural schools. She argues that inclusion “by default” can lead to a principled approach to inclusive education if there is commitment on the part of education authorities, school management and teachers. She also identifies three critical areas for inclusive teacher education: a contextual understanding of inclusive education; the development of skills to apply, adjust and modify learning situations through pedagogical encounters; and continuous professional development through reflection and problem solving. The third chapter on teacher development returns to South Africa. Jean Fourie and Elizabeth Hooijer report on in-service professional development for teachers in full-service schools. These are schools designated by South African policy to be the frontrunners of inclusive education. They are to develop the human resource and infrastructural capacity to include learners with low and moderate support needs in natural proportion to the incidence of these learners in the communities served by the schools. Fourie and Hooijer explore the extent

Making Education Inclusive

5

of the knowledge and skills of teachers and district officials both before and after the training received, and they discuss the content of the training programme. The authors report positive outcomes of the training, but note that there are many systemic constraints on effective inclusive practice. The final chapter in this cluster considers contextual influences on novice teachers, with a focus on New Zealand. The author, Vijaya Dharan, argues that teacher educators have a professional obligation to provide ongoing support for novice teachers and their mentors. This, she maintains, is necessary to ensure that the theoretical gains made in initial teacher education in terms of being responsive and inclusive are sustained and applied. Dharan works in the often neglected space between initial teacher education and early career teaching, and her chapter spans teacher development from the practicum to the classroom. She provides interesting illustrations from her research with student teachers, and points to ways in which the practicum might enable or constrain more responsive and inclusive teaching. Important implications of this research for initial teacher education for inclusion are raised, with a particular call for the development of professional and learning communities.

School and classroom interventions The next pair of chapters moves from teacher development to consider two school and classroom practices, and ways in which these might make education more inclusive. These chapters move the focus from some of the meta ideas of inclusive education to research-based inclusive practice in schools by examining how teachers can reduce exclusion and promote access and participation for all learners. Reducing exclusion and marginalisation in schools requires a critical examination of school culture, policy and practice. It also requires teachers to implement pedagogical and other strategies that have been shown to be more inclusive of learner diversity, especially where learners are seen to have additional support needs. Thus these chapters go some way in translating inclusive policy or rhetoric (Nutbrown 1998) into what it might mean to realise inclusive practice in schools. Veronica Moodley engages with the issue of challenging behaviour, with a focus on foundation phase learners (grades 1–3). She reports on her ongoing research with teachers in Limpopo province in South Africa regarding the extent to which one model of behaviour support, the Positive Behaviour Support model, could serve as a useful tool in the identification and support of learners with behavioural difficulties. Moodley argues that it is essential to evaluate the contexts in which behavioural difficulties

6

Introduction

occur and are sustained in order to understand the behaviour, as well as the possible supports that could be offered to teachers in their responses to that behaviour. Although the study is context specific, it shows the value of a module on behaviour support in a pre-service teacher education programme. In particular, such a module might shift pre-service teachers’ discourse of learners as naughty, to one that considers behaviour in the light of the complex interplay of factors and actors in a learner’s life. The second of these two chapters is a conceptual discussion on metacognition and classroom instruction. Authored by Sharon Moonsamy, it explores an awareness of cognition and strategies that teachers should be mindful of, when developing effective classroom instruction. Moonsamy argues that the teachers’ awareness of their own cognition is fundamental to developing thinking learners. She maintains that explicit metacognitive instruction exposes all learners to higher order processing, making learning inclusive and accessible throughout the grades.

Beyond the school gates The field of inclusive education has tended to concern itself primarily with schools and schooling. Inclusivity is, however, an ethical project (Allan 2005) that reaches beyond the school gates. University education has a somewhat ambiguous relationship with inclusive education, given that access to university is not expected to be universal, with stringent academic entrance requirements usually applied. Access to, and success in university in South Africa is largely determined by previous advantage and relative privilege (Walton, Bowman and Osman forthcoming). Students with disabilities may find themselves further disadvantaged by disabling institutional practices and infrastructural constraints. Whether at university, or in society at large, discriminatory attitudes towards people with disabilities continue to function as “disabling barriers” (Oliver 2013, 1024) and these need to be recognised and challenged. University campuses are characterised by spatial complexity and the need for people with limited mobility to be able to move efficiently from one facility to another. Interventions that are made in response to accessibility legislation tend to be piecemeal and inadequate. Anne Fitchett explores adaptive co-management in her chapter as she reports on a pilot study on the Education Campus of the University of the Witwatersrand. She argues for a more systemic and rights-based approach to the facilitation of universal physical mobility. This means that technical interventions need to be informed through engagement with a variety of stakeholders, specifically people with impaired mobility; and that

Making Education Inclusive

7

implementation should be incremental, drawing on the experiences of these end-users. It seems particularly apposite that the Education Campus is the focus of Fitchett’s work. Pre-service teachers will be learning on a campus where access for people with disabilities has been prioritised. We might hope that these pre-service teachers would enter the profession with an understanding of the need to address disabling barriers in the built environment. Finally, Jane Mutasa and Nancy Ruhode engage with parental attitudes to disability. This chapter, drawing on research in Zimbabwe, raises important concerns in the African context regarding attitudes to people with disabilities, including beliefs about the causes of disabilities. Significantly, parents indicate that the learning of their children has not been affected by the presence of children with disabilities, and they maintain that their children benefit from the inclusive learning model.

Towards more inclusive education Making education inclusive is no small endeavour, and a book like this cannot begin to encapsulate what is required to achieve this at various levels of education and society. What it does hope to achieve, though, is to offer a record of some of the thinking and working that people in academic spaces are engaged in to dismantle exclusion and promote inclusion in their educational spheres. The editors acknowledge that the contributions to this book do not represent a consistent theoretical orientation, or even an agreed understanding of what inclusive education is or should be. The contributors come from different disciplinary backgrounds and are likely to see themselves at different points on a “spectrum” (Allan and Slee 2008, 16) of inclusive education researchers or scholars. This collection thus represents an inclusive approach to the field of inclusive education, and we need to make it clear that the contents of the chapters reflect the views of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors, SAALED or The UNESCO Chair in Teacher Education for Diversity and Development. The 2013 Making education inclusive conference took place under the shadow of the failing health of former South African president, Nelson Mandela. These words of his were displayed prominently throughout the conference: “Education is the great engine of personal development. It is through education that the daughter of a peasant can become a doctor, that the son of a mineworker can become the head of the mine, that a child of

8

Introduction farmworkers can become the president of a great nation.” (Mandela 1994, 194)

The challenge is that by making education inclusive, its transformative potential becomes accessible to all.

References Allan, J. 2005. Inclusion as an ethical project. In Foucault and the government of disability, ed. S. Tremain, 281–297. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Allan, J. and R. Slee. 2008. Doing inclusive education research. Rotterdam: Sense. Alur, M. and V. Timmons eds. 2009. Inclusive education across cultures. Los Angeles: Sage. Armstrong, D., A. Armstrong and I. Spandagou. 2011. Inclusion: by choice or by chance? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15 (1): 29–39. Artiles, A., E. Kozleski and F. Waitoller eds. 2011. Inclusive education. Examining equity on five continents. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press. Booth, T. and M. Ainscow eds. 1998. From them to us. An international study of inclusive education. London: Routledge. Department of Education (DoE). 2001. White Paper Six: Special Needs Education–Building an Inclusive Education and Training System. Pretoria: Department of Education. Eloff, I. and L. Kgwete. 2007. South African teachers’ voices on support in inclusive education. Childhood Education, 83 (6): 351–355. Forlin, C. 2010. Reframing teacher education for inclusion. In Teacher education for inclusion, ed., C. Forlin, 3–12. London: Routledge. Florian, L. and M. Rouse. 2010. Teachers’ professional learning and inclusive practice. In Confronting obstacles to inclusive education, ed., R. Rose, 185–199. London: Routledge. Kisanji, J. 1998. The march towards inclusive education in non–Western countries: Retracing the steps. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 2 (1): 55–72. Kozleski, E, A. Artiles and F. Waitoller. 2011. Introduction. Equity in inclusive education. In Inclusive education. Examining equity on five continents, eds. A. Artiles, E. Kozleski and F. Waitoller, 1–14. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press. Mandela, N. 1994. Long walk to freedom. London: Abacus.

Making Education Inclusive

9

Morrow, W. 2007. Learning to teach in South Africa. Cape Town: HSRC Press. Nutbrown, C. 1998. Managing to include? Rights, responsibilities and respect. In Managing inclusive education: From policy to experience, ed. P. Clough, 167–176. London: Paul Chapman. Oliver, M. 2013. The social model of disability: Thirty years on. Disability & Society, 28 (7): 1024–1026. Slee, R. 2011. The irregular school. London: Routledge. Stofile, S. and L. Green. 2007. Inclusive education in South Africa. In Responding to the challenges of inclusive education in Southern Africa, eds. P. Engelbrecht and L. Green, 52–65. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Venkat, H. 2012. Reading between the lines: Examining “opportunity to learn” in a sample of Eastern Cape workbooks. In Finding place and keeping pace, eds. S. Motala, V. Dieltiens and Y. Sayed, 107–119. Cape Town: HSRC Press. Walton, E. 2011. Getting inclusion right in South Africa. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46 (4): 240–245. —. 2015. Global concerns and local realities: The “Making education inclusive” conference in Johannesburg. Intervention in School and Clinic, 50(3): 173–177. Walton, E., B. Bowman and R. Osman. Forthcoming. Promoting access to higher education in an unequal society. South African Journal of Higher Education, 29 (1).

CHAPTER ONE DISMANTLING THE EMPIRE OF EDUCATIONAL EXCLUSION1 ELIZABETH WALTON

Introduction It may seem unlikely that a volume dedicated to making education inclusive begins with a chapter on exclusion. Indeed, it may seem churlish and a rebuttal of the valiant efforts made by people in various contexts to make education more inclusive. There is much literature available that supports a positive orientation to inclusive education, with many texts promising solutions and strategies to make inclusion work (Pienaar and Raymond 2013). In texts like these, the current education system is assumed to be generally unproblematic, just needing teachers “trained” to be able to adapt or modify what they do so that the previously “excluded” can be accommodated. Taking this approach, however, makes those seeking “inclusion” a burden on the system (Slee 2011), representing a constant additional effort that needs to be made for certain learners by teachers and school managers. It is therefore not surprising that teachers cite inclusive education as yet another imposition on their “regular” work, together with new curricula and other administrative responsibilities (Stofile and Green 2007). This chapter is premised on the idea that recognising and resisting exclusion must be the starting point in making education inclusive. For inclusive education to serve its mandate to promote the access and participation of all learners in quality education systems, it first needs to understand and address the exclusionary pressures that currently operate in schools and the wider education system. In particular, it has to

 1

This chapter is based on the keynote address given at the Making Education Inclusive professional development conference held in Johannesburg on 4 July 2013.

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

11

acknowledge the ways in which schools both lead and lag social inequality. Access to quality education is both determined by, and determining of social and economic status and educational achievement, or lack thereof. Thus access determines destinies. Inclusive education will have to do more than find ways to “accommodate” certain learners by making adaptations to curricula, but will have to look critically at the architecture of schooling to see how exclusion is inherent in many of our current arrangements (Slee 2011). Educational exclusion has been metaphorically compared to an empire by Roger Slee (2011) and in the section that follows, I will explore the conceptual possibilities that this metaphor offers.

The empire metaphor In analysing how a metaphor works conceptually, we need to understand how the characteristics of the source domain (empires) are mapped onto the target domain (educational exclusion). I would suggest that there are at least three characteristics of empires that further our understanding of educational exclusion. These are that empires are vast and pervasive, they serve the interests of society’s elite and they are powerful and difficult to resist. I am going to discuss each of these separately in terms of educational exclusion before suggesting how the empire can be resisted.

Empires are vast and pervasive Well-known sayings about the British and Roman empires capture the vastness and pervasiveness of empires. It was said that, “All roads lead to Rome” at the time when the Roman Empire was at the peak of its power, and roads had been built linking the various provinces of that empire with its centre. The sun supposedly never set on the British Empire in its heyday, attesting to the reach of that empire across the globe. Similarly, the reach and impact of educational exclusion is vast. Exclusion pervades much of what happens in education, and because it is so commonplace, we tend to ignore it, or assume that it has to be so. Importantly, we find it difficult to imagine anything else. In the introduction to his account of the struggle to abolish slavery, Adam Hochschild (2005) explains how imagining a world without slavery was almost impossible to British citizens during the eighteenth century. Those who might have conceded that abolition was theoretically desirable, would still have seen it as impractical, since the economy of the British Empire depended on slavery. So too, the facts of educational exclusion become absorbed into our

12

Chapter One

schemas of how education is, and we find it difficult to consider that it could be any other way. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) include the target that by 2015, there will be universal primary education. Many countries have made significant progress towards this, but the target is unlikely to be met, with Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) being home to most of the out-of-school children in the world (UNESCO 2013/4). Lewin (2009, 155) looks closely at patterns of access to education in SSA and offers useful insights into educational exclusion. In particular, he proposes a model of “zones of exclusion” which shows that educational exclusion is a nuanced phenomenon. The first zone, is that of those children who never enrol in school. There are two sub-groups in this zone, both of which resonate with the traditional concerns of inclusive education. The first of these subgroups is that of children who could or should be enrolled in conventional schools, and require that the formal system extends its reach, and the second is of children who for various reasons (e.g. nomadic lifestyle or disability) are precluded from the conventional system and will require non-traditional solutions to educational access. In South Africa, the government reports at least 200 000 children out of school, mostly because of lack of access to what they call “special needs” support (Department of Basic Education 2010), although other factors are also implicated in children being out of school. While this number may be relatively small in terms of the overall enrolment in 20102, it remains significant. South Africa ranks among the countries in Africa with the highest percentage of disabled children out of school (UNESCO 2009). Globally, disability remains a significant reason for children not attending school, with the Education for All Global Monitoring report of 2013/4 noting “children at higher risk of disability are far more likely to be denied a chance to go to school” (UNESCO 2013/4). Lewin’s second zone is the zone of the highest dropout, and this occurs in the primary school years or in the transition to secondary school. Factors that Lewin (2009, 156–157) cites as being “precursors” to dropout include issues that can be seen as exogenous to schools, like household poverty, poor health and nutrition, child labour and overage enrolment, and those endogenous to schools, like poor teaching, large classes and degraded facilities. Low achievement and repetition, also precursors to exclusion, may arise from both school and contextual factors. Those who drop out usually become permanently excluded. The third zone of

 2

In 2010 there were 12 250 000 learners in all schools in the country (Snyman 2011).

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

13

exclusion is that of “silent exclusion” where learners are in schools but they are at risk of dropping out. Here factors such as sporadic attendance, low achievement and discrimination are influential, and compounded by sickness and nutritional deficiency. The fourth zone of exclusion represents those who are excluded from lower secondary school, either because they were not selected or because they could not afford the costs. Finally, the fifth zone refers to those who fail to complete secondary school, and reasons cited here include poor performance, lack of motivation, pregnancy and affordability. It is clear from Lewin’s descriptions of the zones of exclusion that poverty is hugely implicated in educational exclusion. But addressing exclusion means more than enrolling learners in schools and suggesting that MDGs are met with 100% gross (or even net) enrolment rates. Lewin (2009, 155) makes the crucial statement that, “Access to ineffective schools with excessive class sizes, few teachers and no learning materials, where little is learned, is not meaningful access to education”. He proposes an expanded definition of education access, which focuses on the quality of education within schools. The minimum requirements for a definition of access should include that schools are safe; that they have acceptable facilities, staff and resources; that learning outcomes that meet national norms are met; that admission and progression is age appropriate; that attendance is consistent and continuous and that post-primary educational opportunities are available. Measured against this definition, the number of children without access to education would be much greater. The notion of “silent exclusion” is relevant here, as learners may be deemed to have access to schools, but they find themselves as tenants on the margins of schools (Slee 2011). They are tenants because their place in school is conditional and possibly temporary, not like those whose experience is “[s]ecure enrolment, attendance and achievement” (Lewin 2009, 156). Exclusion pervades much of what happens on a daily basis in schools too, as a constant process of sorting takes place in the race to be the best. Many teachers (and parents) cannot imagine schooling without stratification according to ability and providing some with “remediation” and others with “enrichment”; without competitions to find the “best” and reward them; and without systematically whittling away the masses until only the elite remain to be given access to rarefied educational, and hence economic opportunities.

14

Chapter One

Empires serve the interests of a powerful elite Living in an empire is usually not good news for people who are poor, weak or marginalised, because empires are not built to serve these people. The empire is perpetuated to serve the economic and social interests of the few, and, in return, these few are invested in preserving the empire. In the comparison with education, exclusion serves those who need to maintain their hold on economic and social privilege. Schools are not neutral institutions. They reflect and reproduce, through various mechanisms, the inequities and injustices of the societies in which they exist. The outcomes of schooling are inevitably inequitable. More affluent people can secure educational advantage for their children through geographical positioning, providing extra tuition and enriching activities and having confidence in dealing with schools. For some learners, enrolment, attendance and achievement in effective schools results in the completion of primary and secondary education, and access to post-secondary education. Their success, though, is relational—it comes at the expense of the educational failure of others (Reay 2010). Reay further suggests that “educational systems across the globe enshrine an educational competition premised on middle class levels of resources and defined by rules that advantage the middle classes” (2010, 403). While Reay’s argument about educational inequality is primarily framed in terms of class inequality, Slee (2011, 157) asks broadly, “Who benefits from the current arrangements?” Reay (2010, 399) might answer that the middle classes do as they have access to “the kind of material, cultural, psychological resources that aid educational success”. Working class children, by contrast, are outsiders in education, or “outsiders on the inside” (Reay 2010, 398). While it is beyond the scope of this chapter to explore the notion of class in any depth, it is evident that educational achievement remains closely linked with class (Brantlinger 2003), and, in SSA, school participation is closely linked to household income (Lewin 2009). Other writers have attempted to describe some of the ways in which schools reproduce the status quo by privileging dominant class assumptions and practices. Bernstein (1964) proposed a code theory in which the restricted codes of working class children, linked to their context of production, were said to be less valued in schools than the elaborated codes of middle class children. Bourdieu maintained that education is part of a process of symbolic and cultural reproduction, with middle and upper class children advantaged in schools because of their social and cultural capital (Sadovnik 2007). Other factors like gender, race and ethnicity, and household structure (Butler and Hamnett 2007) also intersect with class to influence educational attainment.

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

15

The current arrangements in schools clearly do not benefit everyone. Consider, for example, pedagogies that hinder epistemological access; language policies that consign certain learners always to learn in an additional language; standardised assessments designed to sort and segregate learners; and facilities that suppose only ambulant users. In addition, discipline policies assume particular cultural norms for behaviour; extra-curricular activities require additional finances and top achievers receive visible rewards. It seems that there is little in the regular school that does not operate to effect a silent exclusion, or position some learners as tenants on the margins of schools (Slee 2011). Competition seems to be particularly complicit in the process of educational exclusion. While competitiveness is not new to education, globalisation seems to have exacerbated the need to be the best to secure economic advantage. Competition operates at every level where resources are perceived to be limited, and where success is perceived to be scarce. But the effects of competitiveness are often deleterious and lead to the exclusion of those who are not successful. Reay (2010, 400) says that “students experience a zero sum game in which one child’s educational success too often means another child’s sense of educational failure”. Educational achievement thus becomes increasingly the result of competing successfully, with many either unable or unwilling to compete. Schools may say that they value everyone equally, but in what they do, they show that they really only value those who achieve academically (or, in some cases, in sport or cultural activities). Dorling (2010) is scathing about the intellectual elitism that is perpetuated in societies, premised on the assumption that some people, because of their extraordinary intelligence, deserve to be put on a pedestal and paid more. He maintains that differences in intelligence are not enough to justify the inequitable division of society’s resources, and is concerned to address the myth that elitism is efficient. Privilege is, however, largely invisible to those who wear it (Kimmel 2010) and power often works “without the conscious knowledge of whose interests are being served” (Lukes 1974, in Branlinger 1997, 438). At all levels of the education system, those who benefit from current arrangements are likely to perpetuate these arrangements, either without consciously considering how these arrangements marginalise or exclude, or, as in the case of those who might have questioned the morality of slavery, simply see it as impractical to do things any other way. It always sparks much debate in my undergraduate education classes when I ask pre-service teachers to question the common practice in schools of recognising top academic achievers with badges to wear on uniforms as a constant mark of their enhanced value, and also with

16

Chapter One

symbolic and material prizes. Clearly, many of the pre-service teachers were recipients of these accolades at school, and they are adamant that this practice serves as a fitting reward for the best learners, as well as a motivation to work harder for the rest. Most pre-service teachers are quick to defend the practice as being a fair competition in a meritocratic world, and resist suggestions that the process may be inherently exclusionary, unfair and hardly a motivation for those struggling to meet minimum criteria. This is a small, even inconsequential example, given the enormity of the problem of educational exclusion, but it does serve to illustrate at a very accessible level, the complicity of the beneficiaries of the status quo in its preservation. To link to the empire analogy, it helps to explain why resisting the power of an empire is difficult.

Empires are powerful and difficult to resist Empires become vast and pervasive because they are powerful and difficult to resist, as the subjugation of people groups who resist the advance of any empire attests. Schools and schooling have remained remarkably stable over time because of “[t]he circular, reciprocal interaction between ideology and institutions” (Brantlinger 1997, 439). Citing Popekewitz, Brantlinger (ibid) expands on this, saying, “[I]nstitutions evolve into hierarchical bureaucracies that resist change and generate ideologies that naturalize their existence”. Prevailing beliefs and practices usually work to impede, resist and obstruct change, and it is not easy to resist these beliefs and practices. But, I would argue, empires do fall and regimes do change. It might be difficult to resist the power of the empire of educational exclusion, but it is possible. In what follows, I suggest that lessons can be learnt from the life and activism of Nelson Mandela which can inform a resistance to, and dismantling of, the empire of educational exclusion.

Dismantling an empire: The life and activism of Nelson Mandela Apartheid South Africa was not an empire in every sense of the word. But, I would suggest, it had characteristics of an empire. Apartheid pervaded every part of South African life, with its reach both grand and intimate. From the institution of the “homelands” and forced removals in the service of “separate development”, to the intrusion of intimate life to prevent miscegenation, the effects of apartheid were ubiquitous. White people were the beneficiaries of apartheid, and they constituted the elite

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

17

whose interests were served by that system. The ideology and machinery of apartheid proved powerful and difficult to resist, as many years of oppression attest. But history shows that resistance was effective, and the apartheid state has been formally dismantled. Many people were active in the struggle against apartheid, but none so famous as South Africa’s former president, Nelson Mandela. The rest of this chapter considers what can be learned about resistance to systemic and pervasive injustice from the life of Nelson Mandela. I suggest that he modelled three approaches to dismantling an empire. These are, simply put, working against the system (active resistance), working around the system, and working towards a more just system. I will apply these three approaches to resisting exclusion in education, with a particular, though not exclusive, focus on South Africa.

Dismantling an empire: Active resistance In the face of the might of the apartheid state, Nelson Mandela and countless others who were discriminated against and disenfranchised resisted their oppression actively. This resistance took a number of forms: defying the petty laws that segregated people in public spaces; civil disobedience; economic boycotts and strikes; marches and demonstrations; and military activities against state and civilian targets. The point here is that those resisting apartheid did not believe that the status quo was either inevitable or immutable, and they sacrificed their lives for liberation. I would argue that dismantling the empire of educational exclusion also requires active resistance and suggest that people at all levels can engage in the following: Identifying and exposing policies, practices and cultures that result in educational marginalisation and exclusion It becomes very difficult to claim ignorance of oppression in the face of active resistance to it. The “ignorance contract” has been explored by Steyn (2012) with reference to South Africa’s apartheid past. Steyn (2012, 8) asserts that apartheid could not have been sustained without the cooperation of white people, who used separate amenities and paid minimum wages, and thus she calls into question claims that white people “did not know what was happening during apartheid”. I would add that when people were being executed for treason against the apartheid state, and shot during protests, and dying in detention, it is difficult to imagine that white people (or the international community) could believe that apartheid

18

Chapter One

was anything but viciously oppressive. “Systematic ignorance”, argues Steyn (2012, 10) “is an important means for the production and maintenance of the unequal positionalities in society”. It is thus incumbent on those who identify exclusionary pressures and practices in education to expose them for what they are, lest anyone claims, “I didn’t know”, and hence, “I am not responsible”. Steyn (2012, 22) cites Smithson in this regard, saying, “Choices around ignorance, to know or not to know, are deeply implicated in choices to take, or evade, responsibility in relation to others”. Identifying and exposing exclusionary practices and pressures in education will require vigilance, being ever alert to the workings of power to perpetuate exclusion. Also important is the systematic uncovering and “flushing out” of exclusionary practices and pressures. Doing this requires a research agenda that considers the (un)intended exclusionary consequences of policies and practices, and a commitment to hear from those whose experience is of marginalisation and exclusion. Tracy’s story is illustrative of one such exclusionary practice, and it is one I often tell to pre-service teachers. Tracy experienced quite severe spelling and other learning difficulties in primary school, and she recounted (once she left school) the excruciating embarrassment that she felt during “peer assessed” spelling tests. The teacher would dictate spelling words and then have the learners swap books and “mark” each other’s tests. Tracy used to dread this moment when her spelling difficulties would be on display for her friends and her experience of humiliation was still keenly felt many years later. Typically, pre-service teachers respond to this anecdote by saying that this type of “peer assessment” is a good practice because it saves time and allows learners to learn from each other. They often note that they had also experienced this practice when they were at school and they had not been harmed by it. Some pre-service teachers, however, realise for the first time that practices that they had never considered problematic may in fact be harmful. This is always an excellent opportunity to explore how people are often unaware of ways in which they are privileged by a system, and those who benefit most are least likely to be critical or see fault. Tracy’s story is an individual experience, and it is not told to individualise or depoliticise educational exclusion. It is told, however, as a reminder that exclusionary practices have a real impact on real lives. School culture and identity is often built on its supposedly distinctive characteristics, and esprit de corps is engendered by emphasising a collective belongingness, enabled by shared values and traditions. The expectation is that both insiders and outsiders will recognise its

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

19

distinguishing characteristics and values. In other words, schools project (and reflect) an image (Bernstein 2000) that defines them, and thus constitute their “here-ness”. By here-ness, I mean the explicit and implicit assumptions not just about place and presence, but what belonging here demands. Here-ness is boundaried, it is categorised apart from there-ness, or anywhere-else-ness. It was thus with some consternation that I overheard the following words from a senior teacher while I sat in a school staff room, waiting to observe a pre-service teacher’s lesson: “You don’t belong here!” The words were directed towards a young man who had been summoned before a committee of his peers and teachers on account of a growing list of misdemeanours. I gathered that his hair was too long, he had repeatedly not done homework, he distracted other learners in class, and his teachers deemed him disrespectful. I have no idea about the outcome of this meeting, as I was called to the pre-service teacher’s classroom, but the incident left me acutely aware of the “here-ness” of schools that makes belonging conditional, and exclusion a constant threat. Challenging behaviour is an issue that South African teachers, like their overseas counterparts, cite as a major impediment to their pedagogical effectiveness. The school I visited was typical of many in South Africa, in that it is crowded, with 40 learners in classrooms built for 25. Teachers feel themselves burdened not only with large classes, but with the challenges of curriculum change and their frustration levels are high. I relay this incident as an example of how school culture and identity may function as an exclusionary pressure. It also suggests that exclusion might not just be something that schools do, but also something they that they believe is necessary to preserve their identity. Refusing to perpetuate exclusionary practices It is one thing to recognise and name exclusionary practices, but those who are serious about actively resisting educational exclusion will have to take a stand and refuse to co-operate with practices that result in marginalisation and exclusion. McIntyre (2009, 607) makes the point that to teach inclusively disrupts the status quo which is premised on “ability labelling and the identication and categorisation of learners in need of additional support” and is “uncomfortable” for school staff. For the individual teacher, this may mean taking a stand against staff-room talk that labels or belittles certain learners, or resisting the pressure to seek quick referrals to special education for learners who seem to be struggling. It might be a willingness to meet parents at a time suitable to them, rather than in times scheduled for the convenience of teachers. Certainly, it

20

Chapter One

means critical reflection on pedagogical practices to determine the extent to which they enable or constrain the epistemological access of all learners, and making necessary changes to teach to enable learning for all. Public advocacy Active resistance is fuelled by the conviction that things can be different, and a refusal to believe that “the way things are” is the way things must be. The activism of Nelson Mandela was directed at the unjust legislation that sustained apartheid, and his release from prison began the repeal of racist laws. Those looking to resist the empire of educational exclusion have a number of issues that they might address in the public domain. These could include challenging policy provisions that set “clauses of conditionality” (Slee 1996) to belonging in schools. They might foreground the educational exclusion of learners, particularly those with disabilities, or draw attention to drop-out rates. They might ask questions in public spaces that draw attention to patterns of unequal attainment, or consequences of seemingly benign policies or practices. The media needs to be harnessed in these endeavours to ensure that the public cannot claim, “We didn’t know”, and political pressure groups need to be formed and sustained. There is no room for complacency when opportunities arise for public comment on current or intended legislation and, indeed, litigation could and should be considered to challenge exclusionary policies and practices.

Dismantling an empire: Working around educational exclusion When powerful forces are at work sustaining an oppressive order, and active resistance seems impossible, then the system needs to be subverted by stealth. In his autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom (1994), Nelson Mandela explains how forbidden communication was facilitated by ingenious means in the Robben Island prison. These included collecting matchboxes discarded by warders, constructing false bottoms to these matchboxes, writing miniscule coded messages, and placing them in the converted matchboxes. These matchboxes would be dropped at strategic points en route to the quarries where political prisoners worked. In turn, the matchboxes would be picked up by prisoners from the general section. In this way communication between sections continued, despite this being a “serious violation of regulations” (499). The matchbox method was later replaced by prisoners who were sympathetic to the resistance and who worked in the kitchen. They would wrap letters and notes in plastic,

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

21

placing them in food drums. In turn, the political prisoners would wrap notes in the same plastic and leave them at the bottom of piles of dirty dishes to be returned to the kitchen. Sometimes, too, notes would be placed under the rim of toilet bowls and retrieved by prisoners from the general sections who had been placed in isolation in the political section. These actions illustrate that Nelson Mandela and his comrades did not accept defeat by a powerful system, but found creative ways to work around that system. I would suggest that while the empire of educational exclusion remains powerful, there is much that can be done to work around it. This might include: Teaching against the grain Mounting challenges and voicing critiques of the educational system is, perhaps, much easier for those who are not working within the system on a daily basis. For teachers who are concerned with educational exclusion, the challenge is to teach against the grain (Cochran-Smith 2004). This, maintains Cochran-Smith (2004, 28) takes a number of forms. It may require teachers to speak out against teaching and testing practices that do not work in the best interests of the learners they teach. It involves teachers being “astute observers” of individual learners and posing questions that challenge conventional wisdom and institutional habit. It might also mean seeing beyond labels and practices that perpetuate the status quo, and asking “unanswerable questions” (ibid). Teaching against the grain involves pursuing opportunities to talk with other teachers about “critical and epistemological aspects of teaching” (ibid), rather than confining conversations to technical issues. Finding alternatives With the bureaucratisation of teaching has come deep resignation in the face of rigid procedures and processes. This is exacerbated in South Africa with a fast-paced curriculum and pressure to keep momentum in curriculum coverage, even at the expense of curriculum mastery. This is sometimes compounded in schools where lesson plans have been prescripted and teachers can easily lose their sense of professional responsibility for making pedagogical choices. Against this background the learner who experiences difficulties in learning for whatever reason, is vulnerable to exclusion. Teachers intent on resisting exclusion will need to be committed to finding alternatives that subvert the pressure towards exclusion. This might be finding alternative ways to access the curriculum,

22

Chapter One

using alternative ways of assessing or creating alternative materials. It might be finding alternative places for field trips, or offering alternative subjects or devising alternative pathways to learning and qualifications. These alternatives do not necessarily dismantle exclusion, but in small ways, they diminish its power for those labouring under its control. Testing the boundaries of the permissible It occurs to me that teachers and education managers can be too quick to acquiesce to constraints of the system. Those really intent on resisting exclusion might find that the empire has more chinks in its armour than we think. Sometimes precedent is just convenient, and there really is no reason we cannot do things differently. So, in South Africa, schools have discovered that learners can complete grade 12 in two years, not only in one, which is the common assumption. Facilitating a two year grade 12 curriculum means that learners who would not otherwise get a grade 12, can do so. Certainly, this does not begin to address the many ways in which the grade 12 examinations serve the purposes of wider exclusion, but it might well make a difference for individual learners. Being flexible, creative and innovative Prisoners on Robben Island had to use their ingenuity to work around the system. They had to recognise the resources they did have, and use them to achieve their purposes. Similarly, those active in resisting exclusion need to apply themselves to the strategic and effective use of what they do have available. A colleague working as a principal in a school in KwaZulu-Natal was frustrated when the local minibus taxi drivers would not stop to pick up learners who used wheelchairs. It takes a longer time to board a taxi with a wheelchair, and a wheelchair takes up space that another passenger could use. This principal could have resigned herself to this state of affairs and accepted the exclusion of learners who used wheelchairs, given that she did not have any control or influence over the taxi industry. Instead, she called a meeting of the taxi owners and drivers, and explained how important it was that learners in wheelchairs were transported to school. In return for their co-operation, the taxi drivers were invited to share in the produce of the school’s vegetable garden. Other schools, finding themselves without the help of classroom assistants in large classes, have looked to students needing to do community service, or community members who can provide support in some way. Again, these measures do not dismantle the systemic pressures towards exclusion

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

23

because of inadequate transport systems, or because of epistemological marginalisation that can occur in large classes. They do, however, offer ways of working around the system.

Dismantling an empire: Working towards access, participation, social justice and inclusion for all This final section is motivated by the observation that the activism of Nelson Mandela and his peers was not merely a working against apartheid. It was also a work towards freedom, democracy and a South Africa that belongs to all who live in it (South African Congress Alliance 1955). Thus, in our activism against the workings of the empire of educational exclusion, there also needs to be a working towards the kind of education that is premised on social justice and democracy. This may mean: Living lives that embody inclusion Nelson Mandela showed that he did not merely espouse non-racialism, he enacted it. Countless examples attest to the bridges he built with people, including meeting the widow of his nemesis, Hendrik Verwoerd, who was one of the architects of grand apartheid. Mandela’s death was publicly mourned by South Africans of all races, in outpourings of grief that captured his vision for a shared humanity. Those active in resisting the empire of educational exclusion could emulate Mandela, and live lives that embody inclusivity. Julie Allan has already captured this as she so wisely said that inclusion is not something we do to a discrete population of learners, it is something we do to ourselves (Allan 2005, 293). Developing this idea, Pienaar and Lombard (2010) have interrogated teaching practices in an endeavour to understand what it means to be an inclusive lecturer, by exemplifying the values of inclusive education while teaching a course in inclusive education. Learning to include by being inclusive I have expounded on this elsewhere (Walton 2011), but reiterate here the possibilities inherent in an approach to inclusivity that starts with the non-negotiable fact of belonging, and commits to whatever learning is necessary to ensure participation. This reflects Aristotle’s idea in the Nicomachean Ethics that “… the things we have to learn before we can do them, we learn by doing them”. Thus, maintains Aristotle, people become

24

Chapter One

builders and musicians by building and making music, and become just by doing just acts. We could, therefore, expect to become inclusive by being inclusive. This is not advocating the reckless “dumping” of children into unresponsive schools, but rather seeking to change the default mindset from one that immediately finds reasons to exclude, to one that assumes inclusion. Espousing high expectations of the type of education that all learners deserve Nelson Mandela made some strategic compromises in bringing South Africa to the first democratic elections in 1994. He did not, however, compromise on key values, and was not prepared to accept the conditional freedom that the apartheid state offered to him intermittently, prior to 1990. So, too, should those advocating for inclusive education, be uncompromising on the kind of education that all children and young people deserve. This means refusing to be satisfied until all children have access to, and can participate fully in quality educational opportunities. It means saying, “If it is not good enough for my children, then it is not good enough for anyone’s children”.

Making education inclusive The title of this book, and indeed the conference that inspired it, is optimistic. It reminds us that education is a human endeavour, and that it is human agents who make education either inclusive or exclusionary. Thus making education inclusive is a choice that can be made, even though we might have to overcome the deleterious effects of a legacy of educational exclusion. Making education inclusive requires a vision for what could be, plans to realise the vision, and the will and resources (Wildeman and Nomdo 2007) to make this a reality with minimal delay. This is not about suggesting naïve solutions—which may, perversely, perpetuate, rather than solve the problem. But we also have a responsibility to our learners and our society to work towards making a material difference in the lives of learners who find themselves marginalised and excluded. We need to seek real solutions for real learners in real schools. The challenge to those seeking to make education inclusive is to span the abstract and the ideal, and the concrete and the real. Grand statements about inclusion and democracy have their place, but they mean little to the grade 7 learner facing exclusion for his behaviour, or to Tracy whose selfesteem was constantly eroded. Long-term plans and incremental change

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

25

are appropriate for those who can afford a long-term view. But a learner who cannot find a school in her neighbourhood with the “capacity” to “include” her has only one school career, and the exclusion she faces matters to her and affects her destiny. Thus the choice to make education inclusive needs to be made in the moment-by-moment interactions at all levels of the education system, by all those with any power to make a difference. In identifying the most important aspect of teaching against the grain, Cochran-Smith (2004, 28) notes that teachers must “depend on the strength of their individual and collaborative convictions that their work ultimately makes a difference in the fabric of social responsibility”.

Concluding thoughts on the dismantling of the empire of educational exclusion A student asked me one day at the end of a postgraduate course in inclusive education whether I honestly thought that inclusive education could actually be realised. She cited the many obstacles to inclusivity that had been revealed in research and confirmed in interactions with teachers in South African schools. Unfortunately, I had to admit that while I had seen pockets of practice where inclusion was a reality, systemic change was unlikely in my lifetime. But to retreat in the face of all the obstacles is not an option, because that would mean that the status quo is acceptable. Moreover, we run the risk of thinking that because there are challenges to making education inclusive, the problem is with the idea of inclusive education. Instead, we need to see the challenges of being inclusive as indicative of the extent and persistence of exclusion. So, this chapter ends with a call to people concerned with the inequities and injustices that result from educational exclusion to resist the empire, to work against it, to work around it, to subvert its power, and to work towards a socially just, democratic and inclusive education system.

References Allan, J. 2005. Inclusion as an ethical project. In Foucault and the government of disability, ed. S. Tremain, 281–297. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Aristotle. n.d. The Nicomachean Ethics. Accessed from http://nothingistic.org/library/aristotle/nicomachean/nicomachean08.html Bernstein, B. 1964. Elaborated and restricted codes. American Anthropologist 66 (6): 55–69.

26

Chapter One

—. 2000. Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. Revised edn. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Brantlinger, E. 1997. Using ideology: Cases of non-recognition of the politics of research and practice in special education. Review of Educational Research 67 (4): 425–459. —. 2003. Dividing classes: How the middle class negotiates and rationalises school advantage. London: Routledge. Butler, T. and C. Hamnett. 2007. The geography of education: Introduction. Urban Studies 44 (7): 1161–1174. Cochran-Smith, M. 2004. Walking the road. Race, diversity, and social justice in teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press. Department of Basic Education. 2010. Action plan to 2014. Towards the realisation of schooling 2025. Pretoria: Department of Education. Dorling, D. 2010. Injustice. Why social inequality persists. Bristol: The Polity Press. Hochschild, A. 2005. Bury the chains. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Kimmel, M. 2010. Introduction. Toward a pedagogy of the oppressor. In Privilege, eds. M. Kimmel and A. Ferber, 1–10. Boulder: Westview Press. Lewin, K. 2009. Access to education in sub-Saharan Africa: Patterns, problems and possibilities. Comparative Education 45 (2): 151–174. Mandela, N. 1994. Long walk to freedom. London: Abacus. McIntyre, D. 2009. The difficulties of inclusive pedagogy for initial teacher education and some thoughts on the way forward. Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (4): 602–608. Pienaar, C. and E. Lombard, 2010. A teacher educator’s practice becoming a living theory. Education as Change 14 (2): 259–271. Pienaar, C and E. Raymond, eds. 2013. Making inclusive education work in classrooms. Cape Town: Pearson. Reay, D. 2010. Sociology, social class and education. In The Routledge international handbook of the sociology of education, eds. M. Apple, S. Ball and L. Gandin, 396–404. London: Routledge. Sadovnik, A. 2007. Theory and research in the sociology of education. In Sociology of education. A critical reader, ed. A. Sadovnik, 3–21. New York: Routledge. Slee, R. 1996. Clauses of conditionality. The reasonable accommodation of language. In Disability and society: Emerging issues and insights, ed. L. Barton, 107–122. London: Longman. —. 2011. The irregular school. London: Routledge. Snyman, J. 2011. Education. In South Africa Survey 2010/2011. Johannesburg: Institute for Race Relations.

Dismantling the Empire of Educational Exclusion

27

South African Congress Alliance. 1955. The Freedom Charter. Accessed from http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=72. Steyn, M. 2012 The ignorance contract: Recollections of apartheid childhoods and the construction of epistemologies of ignorance. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 19 (1): 8–25. Stofile, S. and L. Green. 2007. Inclusive education in South Africa. In Responding to the challenges of inclusive education in Southern Africa, eds. P. Engelbrecht and L. Green, 52–65. Pretoria: Van Schaik. United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (UNESCO). 2009. Education for all global monitoring report. Paris: UNESCO. —. 2013/4 Education for all global monitoring report. Paris: UNESCO. Walton, E. 2011. Getting inclusion right in South Africa. Intervention in School and Clinic 46 (4): 240–245. Wildeman, R. and C. Nomdo. 2007. Implementation of inclusive education: How far are we? Occasional Papers: IDASA Budget Information Service. 1–35. http://www.idasa.org.za.

CHAPTER TWO THEORISING PRIMARY MATHEMATICS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT IN INCLUSIVE WAYS HAMSA VENKAT

Introduction In this chapter, I report on the ways in which we are thinking about primary mathematics teacher development in the context of a five-year research and development project working with ten government primary schools in the Johannesburg area. This focus is driven by an empirical problem—the need to think about teaching development in inclusive ways, in the context of two initiatives within our own project, set within a broader landscape of curriculum reforms and other provincial initiatives. This multi-initiative terrain is described as increasingly common in the education policy landscape (Hargreaves 1994). Broader evidence in South Africa also suggests significant gaps in teacher content knowledge and pedagogic content knowledge related to mathematics, pointing to another feature that needs to be taken into account within teacher development work. This situation has implications for the ways in which we conceptualise any impact of our initiatives. The teachers we are working with are subject to multiple interventions, with some involved in both of our key projects. In this chapter, I share the ways in which we are starting to theorise how we fit into this policy landscape, and how we think about mapping changes in pedagogic practices in ways that take account of both the baseline pedagogic practices that we saw being enacted in Foundation Phase mathematics classrooms at the start of our project in 2011, and the multi-initiative policy context that our teachers are situated within. As such, this theorisation seeks to work inclusively with pedagogic zones of proximal development and the broader policy landscape that these pedagogic practices are located in.

Theorising Primary Mathematics Teacher Development

29

This chapter is structured as follows: I begin with a brief account of some of the problems that have been noted in South African primary mathematics learning and teaching in the post-apartheid era, including evidence from our own baseline analyses. This leads into a discussion of key initiatives in the national and provincial policy contexts, as well as detail on the two main interventions within our project—the Wits Maths Connect-Primary (WMC-P) project. The concluding section of the chapter is focused on developing a framework that looks across these interventions. The framework is introduced, and then discussed with reference to the earlier sections—how it begins at the level of current identified problems (thus justifying the argument that we are working in pedagogic zones of proximal development), and how it accommodates the orientations of both our own initiatives, and the initiatives in the broader policy landscape.

South Africa: Primary mathematics learning and teaching Poor performance in mathematics at all levels of the schooling system is widely documented in South Africa across a range of national, regional and international tests. Gaps between the intended curriculum and learning are already widespread by the end of the Foundation Phase (grades 1–3) (DBE 2012), with a mean national percentage score of 41% recorded in the 2012 Annual National Assessment at grade 3 level. Schollar (2008) documents an issue within learner work that has been highlighted in a range of research studies—the ongoing prevalence of unit counting well into the Intermediate Phase years. Hoadley (2007) also notes this phenomenon in a sample of Western Cape schools, stating in addition to this that random “guessing” answers appeared to be seen as a legitimate practice within Foundation Phase mathematics lessons. Baseline grade 2 learner testing working with a sample of learners across the attainment range in our ten project schools in 2011 backed findings of the prevalence of unit counting, with three quarters of the sample using unit counting strategies involving counting out all quantities for single digit addition and subtraction (Venkat 2011). Shortcomings in primary mathematics teaching have been described in a range of ways. Linking with the learner level finding of the prevalence of concrete counting strategies, Ensor et al (2009) have noted the ongoing provision of concrete counting materials like cubes and counters into grade 3, working against progressing children into more sophisticated calculation based strategies. In terms of research, the problem receiving the greatest degree of attention relates to teacher knowledge of

30

Chapter Two

mathematics. At the level of content knowledge, a number of recent studies have noted gaps at the level of content knowledge (Taylor 2011), with many pointing to primary mathematics teachers’ inability to solve some common Intermediate Phase (up to grade 6) problems. There is acknowledgement in this body of work of the ongoing legacies of apartheid on schooling and teacher knowledge, given the highly limited and frequently disrupted access to schooling of so many teachers in the system. Given research that points to the lack of any straightforward relationship between mathematical knowledge and classroom practice, some studies have also paid attention to primary teachers’ pedagogic content knowledge, pointing to weaknesses in this area also (Carnoy, Chisholm et al 2008). Smaller scale qualitative studies have turned their attention to understanding mathematical knowledge as it is manifested in teaching. While theorised in a range of ways, ideas relating to lack of connections and coherence figure across much of this body of work. Ambiguity in teacher talk and a lack of structured sequencing of tasks have been highlighted by Venkat and Naidoo (2012), leading to a phenomenon that they term “extreme localisation” in which individual tasks come to be handled and completed in highly discrete and disconnected ways. Ensor et al (2009) note the weak pacing and seeming lack of understanding of progression in early number that underlies the ongoing provision of unstructured concrete counting resources into grade 3. In re-analysing episodes from previously published work across primary and secondary mathematics, Venkat and Adler (2012) point to the importance of teachers’ use of explanations within their identification of “mathematical discourse in instruction” as an important construct to focus on in contexts of disconnections within teaching. Baseline analyses of teaching within our project have pointed to a range of features within this teacher discourse. Askew, Venkat and Mathews (2012) and Venkat (2013) point to nuances in the claims that are widely asserted in the public discourse about gaps in teacher knowledge. Drawing on episodes of Foundation Phase number teaching, both papers point to correct answers being produced in the course of disconnected, or otherwise problematic, explanations. They use these episodes to highlight that the problem for Foundation Phase mathematics teaching may not be content knowledge in any simplistic sense; rather the issue relates to gaps in attunement to either the nature of mathematics—linked by Venkat (2013) to the idea of syntactic knowledge—or the nature of mediation of learning in Askew et al’s (2012) paper. While connections are highlighted as an important, and yet varying, feature within mathematics teaching in the international

Theorising Primary Mathematics Teacher Development

31

literature (Askew et al 1997), what distinguishes the South African evidence on disconnection is the scale of the problem. Where international writing points to the need for connections between topics and representations over relatively extended stretches of time, some of the South African evidence points to disconnections within tasks and examples, and to a highly localised emphasis on producing answers to immediate problems, without considering the longer term understandings and skills that need to be constructed alongside immediate task completion. In the broader South African education landscape, there are bigger complexities relating to a highly inequitable terrain. Fleisch (2008) highlights the bi-modal pattern of performance in primary mathematics, in which a small minority of learners attains well in literacy and numeracy by the end of primary schooling, while the majority of learners perform very weakly both in relation to the levels of attainment presented in curricula, and in relation to other African countries. This brief overview of literature raises several flags for consideration when theorising any impacts of teacher education. There is a need for sensitivity to diversity across school contexts and outcomes, while simultaneously bringing awareness of significant and widespread gaps in teacher knowledge. Capturing change in this environment requires teacher development work and theorisations that work from the ground upwards. This means, at the more local level of early number teaching, addressing issues related to mathematical progression in early number, which would include the introduction of more structured number resources that are inlaid with non-unit ways of counting—i.e. artefacts like bead strings, finger-hand based counts, abaci and 100 squares—which use five and/or 10 as benchmarks. At the broader level, attending to shifts in teachers’ mathematical discourse in instruction with an ear focused on the need for moves towards connections and coherence over time, would appear to be important.

The South African primary mathematics policy landscape The primary mathematics terrain in South Africa has been the object of several recent layers of policy implementation. At the national level, the Foundations for Learning (FFL) campaign (DoE 2008) introduced both a termly “milestones” based curriculum and the standardised Annual National Assessment (ANA). This policy also placed explicit emphasis on structured resources like abaci and 100 squares that were distributed to many schools. While the FFL policy was overlaid on the mandatory Revised National Curriculum Statement (DoE 2002), 2012 saw its replacement with the new Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement

32

Chapter Two

(CAPS) (DBE 2011). CAPS retained the FFL emphasis on a centrally prescribed pacing and sequencing of content, offering a weekly schedule for content coverage, and increased school level monitoring of results on the ANA. The provision of free national learner workbooks formed an additional layer of provision alongside CAPS implementation. In Gauteng, the province that Johannesburg is located within, and where the WMC-P project operates, a further policy initiative was introduced in 2012 entitled the Gauteng Primary Literacy and Mathematics Strategy (GPLMS). Operating in over eight hundred primary schools (including seven of the 10 schools in the WMC-P project), a central feature of this policy is the provision of daily scripted lesson plans, aligned with the CAPS curriculum and adding a further level of specification to content coverage. Coaches employed as part of the implementation process support and monitor coverage of the prescribed curriculum. On one level, the increasing prescription of content and its sequencing, and standardisation of pacing across these policy initiatives represents a response to evidence of slow pacing and poor sequencing within the enacted curriculum (Reeves and Muller 2005). On the other hand, the standardisation sits at odds with educational theory that points to the need for teaching to be responsive and tailored to diversity amongst learners. In this standardisation it is, by definition, difficult to be responsive to differing needs, either within, or between classrooms or schools. From our perspective, one way for us to think about these multiple layers of policy in the school landscape was to characterise the policy terrain as primarily focused on the provision of artefacts aimed at improving and standardising the sequencing and pace of content coverage. While the artefacts themselves vary across curriculum schedules with weekly plans, scripted daily lesson plans, learner workbooks and structured number resources, a common feature across these is the insertion into the classroom landscape of artefacts for use within mathematics teaching.

WMC-Project: Key initiatives As stated already, the Wits Maths Connect–Primary project is a fiveyear (2011–2015) research and development project. The project’s remit is to work with ten government primary schools in one district across this period to design and implement initiatives focused on improving the teaching and learning of mathematics in ways that have potential to work at a larger scale. Two key initiatives have figured within the WMC-P

Theorising Primary Mathematics Teacher Development

33

project to date—the Lesson starters project (LSP) and the 20-day primary mathematics for teaching course.

The lesson starters project The LSP project aims to impact on early number teaching in the Foundation Phase in ways that support the development of number sense. Drawing on the significant body of work on progression in early number learning (e.g. Anghileri 2006, Askew and Brown 2003, Gray 2008, Thompson 2008) with specific focus on a range of the interim transition stages from more concrete to more abstract strategies for working on number problems (Wright, Martland and Stafford 2006), the LSP project is developing sets of activities focused on supporting the development of more sophisticated strategies for working with number. These activities are demonstrated and discussed with participating teachers in the project schools in workshops, with follow up observations and feedback on their teaching with these activities in the opening segment of mathematics lessons. Supporting resources for use with these activities like number lines, structured bead strings and 100 squares are distributed alongside the activities in instances where these resources are not available via national policy directives. The focus on the opening segment of the lesson is linked to the CAPS and GPLMS policy context. Given the pressure that the majority of our partner schools are under to follow the content sequence and timeframes for coverage, we decided to focus our attention on the “mental mathematics” portion of the lesson. This is a mandated part of the “whole class activity” section within lessons in the broader curriculum formulations. Brief examples of the kinds of tasks that can figure within the mental mathematics section are given in the CAPS curriculum in the following terms: “Mental mathematics will include brisk mental starters such as ‘the number after/before 8 is; 2 more/less than 8 is; 4+2; 5+2, 6+2’ etc.” (DBE 2011, 11)

While our interest was number sense as a broader competence than mental mathematical skill, part of our rationale for using the mental slot was driven by a curriculum that demanded mental mathematical skills with little guidance on the progressions through which these are developed. In some instances, the wording indicated advice that linked to some of the empirical problems that I highlighted in the literature review relating to the ongoing provision of unit counting resources:

34

Chapter Two “When doing mental mathematics, the teacher should never force learners to do mental calculations that they cannot handle—writing materials and/or counters should always be available for those learners who may need them.” (DBE 2011, 13)

This advice veers towards suggesting that ongoing unit counting, using counters or tally marks on paper, is acceptable for struggling learners—a view that is disputed in the literature and yet noted as prevalent in my earlier literature review. Given that the LSP intervention was centred on the provision of tasks, activities and resources aimed at developing number sense, its orientation aligned with the artefact-led focus on teacher change that I described as predominant in the policy landscape.

The 20-day primary mathematics knowledge for teaching course A 20-day course focused on developing mathematics content knowledge from a pedagogic perspective was launched in 2012. The course is structured as eight two-day blocks across the school year, with eight half-days in between for school-based work based on the course. Three or four teachers from each partner school, selected by school principals, attend the course. The central focus of the course is on building teachers’ relationships with mathematics from a pedagogic perspective. This focus is driven by the evidence detailed in the literature review section, which points to gaps in content knowledge and pedagogic content knowledge—with classroom evidence of disconnections and lack of coherence in teachers’ discourse in the activity of teaching. Thus, a key thrust of this initiative is on building coherent explanations of mathematical ideas, ensuring connections between task, talk and representations. This coherence is initially focused on single examples, and then builds to focus on example sequences. The orientation of this initiative is not centred on teacher development via artefact provision. Rather, the emphasis is on changing pedagogic processes via teachers’ mathematical discourse in instruction—which can be looked at within single tasks or examples (see Venkat and Adler 2012) or across sequences of examples (Adler and Venkat 2014). Within the project then, we have two avenues to consider in theorising primary mathematics teaching development: improved mediation of learning via the incorporation of artefacts, and/or via teachers’ mathematical discourse in instruction. The first of these aligns well with the thrust of national policy at the current time. The second is aligned more specifically with our view in the project that it is important to focus

Theorising Primary Mathematics Teacher Development

35

on teachers’ mathematical knowledge in practical ways if we are to impact in sustainable ways on primary mathematics learning outcomes. I conclude by drawing from socio-cultural theory to examine how we are thinking about these two dimensions in ground upwards ways (with the ground described in the literature review) while at the same time, building towards the kinds of teaching that we believe will support connected and cumulative mathematical learning.

A tentative model for theorising primary mathematics teacher development The empirical problem noted in the opening sections of this chapter related to the need to think about teacher development in ways that are linked to the ground of current pedagogic practices, and placed our initiatives in the broader policy landscape. This empirical problem brings both existing historical formulations of pedagogy and the sociocultural context of pedagogy into the frame. A priori of other considerations, there are already arguments here for veering towards socio-cultural historical theories to conceptualise pedagogic shifts. Vygotsky’s work (Vygotsky 1987), and the work of other Vygotskian theorists exploring the notion of learning as directed towards the development of higher psychological functions, and teaching as involving mediation from the vantage point of “scientific concepts”—has indeed formed the underpinning orientation to our theorisation of teacher development. While the emphasis in this paper is on the contextual rationales for our theorisation rather than the model’s links with socio-cultural historical theory, key links to Vygotskian notions in our model are noted. The work of Alex Kozulin (2003) led our team into looking at mediation of learning as occurring through two avenues—artefact mediation and human mediation. This fitted well with both the broader policy context and the orientations driving our interventions, while adding the Vygotskian notion of schooling’s central role in the development of higher psychological functions, which are supported by teaching that operates from the vantage point of “scientific concepts”. Mediation that pulls towards generality or towards the more specialised ways of thinking that define disciplines is described by Kozulin (ibid.) as moves towards the scientific terrain. In this view, artefact-mediation moves (via the use of policy or LSP resources) or human-mediation moves (via teachers’ mathematical discourse in instruction) that pull towards either generality or more domain-specific ways of thinking, qualify as moves driven by the scientific concept terrain. In this formulation, incorporation of structured

Chapter Two

36



Mathematical discourse in instruction take-up: 20 day course

number artefacts like the 100 square can be interpreted as artefact-based mediation that pulls towards conceptualisations of number underpinned by the decimal system, and thus, a scientific concept. Similarly, teacher explanations or modelling of more sophisticated strategies for solving an early number problem could be characterised as teacher mediation underpinned by domain-specific notions of progression. Given our interest in developing teachers’ understandings of progression in early number, this delineation provided some useful handles. However, this kind of mediation remained quite distant from some of the more disconnected and ambiguity-laden teaching that I have detailed earlier. Thus, in order to connect with this ground, the project team discussed and developed a two-dimensional framework based on artefactled and teacher-led actions, which began in a ground characterised by disconnection, and built gradually towards generality and/or increasingly domain specific concepts (see Figure 2.1).

Artefact take-up: LSP project Figure 2.1 Modelling primary mathematics teacher development

Drawing on baseline data of teaching drawn from our project schools, and bringing this together with our reading of the broader literature on primary mathematics teaching in South Africa and our interpretation of the policy and project contexts, we worked on staging posts, building from the ground up, towards the kinds of artefact and human mediation that might characterise mediation in the zone of proximal development. The staging

Theorising Primary Mathematics Teacher Development

37

posts on these two axes are currently defined in the following hierarchical terms:

Artefact take-up x No structured artefact presence x Structured artefact presence x Well-structured artefact presence (seen in example sequence that pulls towards generality/more domain specific cognitive functioning) x Well-structured artefact presence (seen in example sequence that pulls towards generality/more domain specific cognitive functioning), that works in the zone of proximal development of learners in the classroom

Mathematical discourse in instruction (MDI) take-up x No MDI/error-laden MDI x MDI that connects with the concept x MDI that connects with the concept and pulls towards generality/more domain specific cognitive functioning x MDI that connects with concept, pulls towards generality and works in the zone of proximal development of learners in the classroom Several critiques of these categories are possible. Of primary concern is that what is often described as the keystone of responsive teaching— working within the zone of proximal development—is placed at the highest level of our model, rather than as an initial requirement. I agree with this characterisation of teaching for learning, but note that much of the evidence that we saw in baseline data in our project classrooms, and described in the broader literature, suggest that this kind of teaching is quite distant from the ground in many South African school contexts. One way of thinking about the gradations on both axes in Figure 2.1 is to view the first three levels on both scales as pertaining to mathematics teacher development for the classroom, and the uppermost level as mathematics teacher development in the classroom. In this model, supporting teachers to work with mathematics for teaching precedes our following them into classrooms and observing their mathematics in teaching—an approach that aligns with our project methodology.

38

Chapter Two

These categories provide us with a way of thinking, tentatively, about teacher change that is inclusive of existing practices, and of the national and provincial policy locales that exert pressure on teachers to work in particular ways with artefacts. We are in the process of using the framework to analyse primary mathematics pedagogies within our project over time, in order to better understand its affordances and constraints in characterising the development of teaching.

Acknowledgements This paper forms part of the work in progress within the Wits SA Numeracy Chair project, entitled the Wits Maths Connect-Primary project. It is generously funded by the FirstRand Foundation, Anglo American, Rand Merchant Bank, the Department of Science and Technology and is administered by the National Research Foundation (NRF). I thank the following members of the Wits Maths Connect-Primary project team for their contributions towards the categories we have developed within the two dimensions of mediation described in this chapter: Lawan Abdulhamid, Corin Mathews, Samantha Morrison, Thulelah Takane, Maria Weitz, Sahar Bayat and Mike Askew.

References Adler, J. and H. Venkat. 2014. Teachers’mathematical discourse in instruction: Focus on examples and explanations. In Windows into mathematics and science teachers’ knowledge, eds. H. Venkat, M. Rollnick, J. Loughran and M. Askew, 132–146. London: Routledge. Anghileri, J. 2006. Teaching number sense. 2nd edn. London: Continuum International Publishing Group. Askew, M. and M. Brown. 2003. How do we teach children to be numerate? A professional user review of UK research undertaken for the British Educational Research Association. London: BERA. Askew, M., Brown, V. Rhodes, D.C. Johnson and D. Wiliam. 1997. Effective teachers of numeracy. Report of a study carried out for the Teacher Training Agency 1995–96 by the School of Education, King’s College London. London: Teacher Training Agency. Askew, M., H. Venkat and C. Mathews. 2012. Coherence and consistency in South African primary mathematics lessons. In Proceedings of the 36th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Opportunities to learn in mathematics education, ed. T. Tso, 27–34. Taipei: Taiwan.

Theorising Primary Mathematics Teacher Development

39

Carnoy, M., L. Chisholm, et al 2008. Towards understanding student academic performance in South Africa: A pilot study of grade 6 mathematics lessons in South Africa. Pretoria: HSRC. Department of Basic Education (DBE.). 2011. Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS): Foundation Phase Mathematics, grade R–3. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education. —. 2012. Report on the Annual National Assessments 2012: grades 1 to 6 & 9. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education. Department of Education (DoE). 2002. Revised National Curriculum Statement grades R–9 (Schools): Mathematics. Pretoria: Department of Education. —. 2008. Foundations for Learning Campaign. Government Gazette 30880 of 2008. Letter to Foundation Phase and Intermediate Phase teachers. Pretoria: Department of Education. Ensor, P., U. Hoadley, H. Jacklin, C. Kuhne, E. Schmitt, A. Lombard and M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen. 2009. Specialising pedagogic text and time in Foundation Phase numeracy classrooms. Journal of Education 47: 5–30. Fleisch, B. 2008. Primary Education in crisis: Why South African schoolchildren underachieve in reading and mathematics. Cape Town: Juta & Co. Gray, E. M. 2008. Compressing the counting process: Strength from the flexible interpretation of symbols. In Teaching and learning early number, ed. I. Thompson, 82–94. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Hargreaves, A. 1994. Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age, London: Cassell, New York: Teachers’ College Press, Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Hoadley, U. 2007. The reproduction of social class inequalities through mathematics pedagogies in South African primary schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies 39 (6): 679–706. Kozulin, A. 2003. Psychological tools and mediated learning. In Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context, eds. A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev and S. S. Miller, 15–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reeves, C. and J. Muller. 2005. Picking up the pace: Variation in the structure and organisation of learning school mathematics. Journal of Education 37: 103–130. Schollar, E. 2008. Final report: The primary mathematics research project 2004–2007: Towards evidence-based educational development in South Africa. Johannesburg: Eric Schollar and Associates.

40

Chapter Two

Taylor, N. 2011. The national school effectiveness study (NSES): Summary for the synthesis report. Johannesburg: JET Education Services. Thompson, I. ed. 2008. Teaching and learning early number. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Venkat, H, 2011. SA Numeracy Chair, Wits: Discussion document for community of practice forum, 22–23 August. Pretoria: NRF. Venkat, H. 2013. Curriculum development minus teacher development  mathematics education. In Proceedings of the 19th annual national congress of the Association for Mathematics Education of South Africa, eds. Z. Davis and S. Jaffer, 4–16. University of the Western Cape, 24–28th June. Venkat, H. and J. Adler. 2012. Coherence and connections in teachers’ mathematical discourses in instruction. Pythagoras 33 (3): 25–32. Venkat, H. and D. Naidoo. 2012. Analyzing coherence for conceptual learning in a grade 2 numeracy lesson. Education as Change 16 (1): 21–33. Vygotsky, L. 1987. Thinking and speech. In The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1: Problems of general psychology, trans. N. Minick, eds. R.W. Rieber and A.S. Carton. New York: Plenum. Wright, R.J., J. Martland and A.K. Stafford. 2006. Early numeracy: Assessment for teaching and intervention. London: Sage Publications.

CHAPTER THREE A GLANCE AT INCLUSION IN A SMALL FINNISH COMMUNITY: ESSENTIAL TEACHER COMPETENCIES SAI VÄYRYNEN

Introduction Finland is a country of wide geographical differences. Densely populated areas are found in the south of the country, whereas the northern and eastern parts are sparsely populated outside the regional main towns. The largest and northernmost province, Lapland, covers 25% of the territory of the country, but the population is only about 180,000 inhabitants out of a total Finnish population of some 5.4 million. Finnish education is grounded on equity and equality. Equity means that all residents of Finland are entitled to receive the same social, health care and education services. Equality is understood as quality of opportunities: No systematic differences should be found based on gender, region or population groups (Finnish National Board of Education [NBE] 2011). However, differences in educational achievements do exist (Kuusela 2006). For instance, boys in the province of Lapland do not perform at the same level as girls do. Nationally, boys’ educational performance in Lapland is the lowest in the country, especially in rural schools. The same regional pattern does not apply to girls. Recently, the Ministry of Education and Culture [MoEC] (2012) has pointed out increasing educational inequalities based on gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status and parents’ educational level. Moreover, the gender gap between girls’ and boys’ attainment in the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) is also increasing. A new system of educational support was introduced as one measure to address discrepancies in access to educational support services across the country (Ministry of Education [MoE] 2007). The new system draws on a three-tiered RTI-approach (Response to Intervention; see, for example,

42

Chapter Three

Fuchs, Fuchs and Compton 2012). It is expected that all teachers can identify learners’ needs and provide occasional general support in the form of, for example, curriculum differentiation, flexible time or extra tuition. Intensified support means ongoing, regular support. The provision of special support requires a multi-professional assessment of the learner’s needs, as well as evidence of intensified support being inadequate (NBE 2013). Educational support builds on the idea of a “neighbourhood school”, where all learners receive any support they need (MoE 2007). However, the Basic Education Act keeps the door open for a segregated special education provision by stipulating that “Special-needs education is provided … in conjunction with other instruction or partly or totally in a special-needs classroom or some other appropriate facility” (Basic Education Act 2010, 5). Inclusive education is not mentioned as a goal or a principle for the provision of support. In the province of Lapland, though, many municipalities provide educational support only in mainstream classes, as special classes are non-existent. Teachers must face inclusion “by default”. In this chapter, inclusion is conceptualised in broader terms than in the Finnish education policy papers. It is understood as a process of inclusion and exclusion in all learning settings. It is about intertwining elements of barriers to presence, participation and achievement, as well as the factors that contribute to individual learning (Malinen, et al 2010; UNESCO 2012). Inclusive education is not only about placement of learners with disabilities or “special educational needs” in certain settings, but instead, about responding to and taking into account the individual needs in any learning community. Inclusion “by default”, on the other hand, refers to contexts where all learners, regardless of their needs, attend their neighbourhood school and receive educational support mainly from their class teachers or subject teachers because the educational support services for learners and support to teachers are very limited or non-existent. It often has a negative connotation as it is thought that learners’ educational needs are not appropriately responded to in such circumstances. The context of the northern part of Finland is acknowledged in class teacher education at the University of Lapland, the northernmost university in the European Union. “Teacher education is faced with special challenges due to the special needs arising from the northern conditions, such as long distances, small educational settings, distance education, multi-grade teaching and the lack of professionals in educational support services (e.g. school psychologists and social workers)”, (Faculty of Education 2007, 9). Inclusive education, therefore, is a crosscutting theme

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

43

in our class teacher education programme. Student teachers complete a master’s degree, with education as the major subject (130 credits), including four teaching practicum periods. They also study all subjects taught in grades 0–6 (60 credits) and specialise in two areas, which can be school subjects, such as mathematics or physical education, or educational studies, such as special needs education or gender studies (50 credits) (Autti and Mella 2012). Taking into account the particular contextual challenges presented above, there is a need to investigate whether our class teacher education enables student teachers to develop appropriate competencies for work in settings where educational support relies almost completely on the teachers themselves. We set up a collaborative research and development project in the north of Finland and northwest Russia to explore and better understand how inclusive education could be enhanced through the teacher education curriculum. This chapter is based on one of the ongoing substudies asking: i) What are the key competencies teachers need in small, rural schools in order to respond to the diversity of learners’ needs? and ii) Does inclusion “by default” contribute to a principled approach to inclusive education?

Research context This chapter focuses on the schools in one municipality in Lapland. For decades, the area has been a source for emigration and migration to the southern parts of Finland. The municipality, which I refer to as “Allin”1, encompasses an area of 8,464 km2 with 1,800 inhabitants. 87.4% of the population are Finnish, and 10.9% of the population are indigenous Sami people. The unemployment rate is approximately 18%. Of those employed, 75% of the workforce is in public services and tourism; the remaining 25% are involved in primary production, such as agriculture and reindeer herding (Regional Council of Lapland n.d.; Työllisyyskatsaukset–Lappi 2013). The total number of learners in basic education in the entire municipality is fewer than 200. They are spread out among four schools that are 30 to 100 km apart from one another. Most learners attend school in the main village but, still, three out of 10 commute between 10 and 50 km. The municipality started to integrate children with disabilities in mainstream classes in the 1990s, as placing them in special schools in the provincial capital became too expensive. Today, the understanding of learner diversity is broader, as there are

 1

Sami language expression for “on the top” or “the highest”.

44

Chapter Three

learners who need educational support to overcome intrinsic and extrinsic barriers to learning in every class. There are two special teachers in the municipality; one is itinerant, and the other is placed in the main village (Allin n.d.). No other specialised services are available for education on a permanent basis.

Research method The study draws on the tradition of educational ethnography (e.g. LeCompte and Preissle 1993) and ethnomethodology (Lahelma and Gordon 2007). In ethnomethodology, school life can be seen as an intersubjective process that becomes ordinary, or predictable, by the “interpretive practices through which people assemble what then comes to be seen as objective features of social life” (Pascale 2011, 105–106). In the context of Finnish Lapland, education seen outside the cultural and geographical context would provide only a superficial view of the realities of the teachers and learners. Therefore, ethnography lends itself well for exploring the different ways in which teachers navigate themselves through socially constructed understandings of meanings and their interpretations of diversity in the context of inclusive education. After the municipal authorities formally gave research permission, the schools volunteered to participate in the study. Teachers whose classes were observed, and who participated in the interviews gave their consent. I carried out the fieldwork including class observations and interviews in April and August 2013. Observations were supported with a schedule, which was developed from the Profile of inclusive teachers (European Agency for the Development of Special Needs Education (EADSNE), see below). The interviews focused on teachers’ reflections of their own practice and their experiences of teaching skills. In addition, I interviewed a representative of the municipality education authority. I took hand-written notes of classroom observations as well as six informal teacher interviews. Seven formal interviews (of about 45–70 minutes each) were recorded on a digital recorder and transcribed in Finnish by a trainee research assistant. The transcripts were then sent to the interviewees for their approval and revision. Finally, all data were imported into NVivo (QSR) software for analysis. As the research is still on-going, only preliminary data analysis has been conducted. It relies on both theory-led and data-driven content analysis. Teacher competencies are set within the framework of the Profile of Inclusive Teachers; and they are described through examples of actual practice in the observed schools. These findings are accompanied by

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

45

teachers’ reflections of their own practice in relation to inclusive education. The emerging competencies will then be discussed as they relate to teacher education.

Teacher competencies A European framework for teacher competencies for inclusion has been developed through a large research project (EADSNE 2012). The framework is founded on four core values related to inclusive education: (1) valuing student diversity, (2) supporting all students, (3) working with others, and (4) personal professional development. Each core value is linked with two key areas of competence, as shown in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 Teacher competencies for inclusion Core value Valuing student diversity: Student difference is considered as a resource Supporting all students: Teachers have high expectations for all students’ achievement

Area of competence Conceptions of inclusive education The teacher’s view of student diversity Promoting the academic, social and emotional learning of all students Effective teaching approaches in heterogeneous groups Working with families Working with a range of educational professionals Teachers as reflective practitioners Initial teacher education as a foundation for ongoing professional learning

Working with others: Collaboration and teamwork are essential approaches for all teachers Personal professional development: Teaching is about learning and teachers take responsibility for their lifelong learning (Table based on EADSNE’s (2012) Profile of inclusive teachers.)

In addition to the values and areas of competence, the framework describes the attitudes and beliefs underpinning each area of competence, the essential knowledge and understanding as well as the skills and abilities to be developed within each area of competence. For a detailed description, the framework is available online: (http://www.europeanagency.org/agency-projects/Teacher-Education-for-Inclusion/Profile-ofInclusive-Teachers.pdf).

46

Chapter Three

Findings Conceptions of inclusive education The interviewed teachers showed an understanding of the local contexts and their impact on learners. They identified poverty and social problems as major barriers to learning. Although the teachers could not do much to change the social or economic conditions of the environment, they knew how a small community could be used for support: “We take holistic care of learners—and as we know everybody, we know where they come from and what kind of difficulties they have at home … economical and all that … so we try to help them” (R)2.

Allin is also characterised by particular cultural features. Indigenous Sami populations have their unique culture, but even “mainstream culture” is characterised by strong relationship to nature and survival skills in the harsh Arctic conditions. Although the comprehensive school reform (implemented between 1970 and 1979 and started from the northern part of Finland) made nine years of compulsory education available for all learners, it did not revolutionise culture: “The family background impacts [on learning]. When I used to teach in [another northern village], there was no tradition of doing schoolwork at home. The children couldn’t understand it because there was no such history at home—paper and pencil aren’t present from early childhood here in our neighbourhoods. Even our upbringing traditions are more functional, somehow freer and kind of different. And our personalities are also more … we are not that … We are more unhurried.” (L)

Studies show a gap in boys’ learning achievements in the region (Kuusela, 2006). The teachers explained this by pointing out that many boys were not motivated towards school-based learning and had many responsibilities at home, such as work with reindeers forestry or maintenance (informal interviews). Many boys attach themselves to the culture and remain in the villages without further education. With their skills in practical work, they can make ends meet and live a happy life. Formal education may not appear attractive for boys whereas girls are found to consider mobility as a means to access further education and employment (Helve 1998, as cited in Lauriala 2012).

 2

Interviews and document citations in Finnish have been translated by the author. The letter refers to the interviewee.

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

47

Teachers’ views of learner diversity Unlike in my other studies on inclusive education (Väyrynen 2006, 2012) diversity in Allin was attached mainly to culture. Finnish and indigenous cultures co-existed in the school which was confirmed by classroom observations and the perusal of the curriculum. Many learners and teachers used both the Finnish and Sami languages, although Finnish dominated as the majority language. Many Finnish-speaking learners studied elective Sami, and elements of Sami culture, such as traditional crafts, were included in the curriculum and studied by all learners. The teachers also attached diversity to behaviour and learning which formed the basis of their work, although this was not without challenges: “I talk of my own experience since I have diversity [of learners] in my class. It’s certainly challenging, the [curriculum] differentiation—so, we have to plan very carefully so that children wouldn’t get frustrated … So, there is an impact on planning.” (A) “In the upper grades, there are learners who need support in every class. In some classes, there are some quite wild cases; it certainly does have an impact on attitudes. Sometimes it is pretty difficult … Sometimes they go well with the rest of the group and sometimes not. It might be awkward, as you might not know what to do when they are disturbing others’ work, but you can’t send them away alone. It’s pretty stressful.” (H)

The teachers also pointed out that the context where they were working demanded certain characteristics of teachers: H: “I think we are very understanding here.” A: “Yes, because we really don’t have any other choice. We’ve had children at very different levels [of development] in normal classes … We have [a] pretty functional system, and, in a way, this is an inclusive school … We have to take into account that diversity …” H: “We must… A: “ … put our heads together and think. Fortunately, we find [solutions]. We might ask [for temporary help]. So, people are flexible and helpful. I think we have a pretty good situation.”

This conversation suggests that although the teachers were faced with inclusion “by default”, there was a commitment for addressing diversity. Teachers developed their professional skills by using some form of

48

Chapter Three

collaborative problem solving to identify ways of responding to barriers to learning, and to build their teaching on diversity.

Promoting the academic, social and emotional learning of all students I found convincing evidence of carefully thought out holistic approaches to learner support in the observed schools. For instance, various environmental and instructional practices were used for the development of communication and functional skills, which are needed to enable presence and participation. Most lessons were structured around whole group and small group activities, as well as individual practice. Multi-channel instructions were given orally and in writing. In the lower grades, these were supported by the use of PCS (picture communication symbols) and other pictures. In the upper grades, time management was carefully dealt with by a teacher who indicated what was expected from the learners during the course of the lesson. The completion of the various tasks did not take a long time, as the teacher wanted to praise learners for success, good concentration and task completion (informal interview). In the lower grades, many teachers introduced the day programme with pictures in the morning, and at the beginning of each lesson. When the lesson or a task had been completed, the picture was taken away or turned around. In this way, learners could see the progression of the day and anticipate what was still needed from them. Due to contextual and cultural characteristics of the area, teachers had developed flexible, individual approaches to addressing barriers to learning: “We estimate that about 9% of the learners in the upper grades are at risk of marginalisation, or they are somehow special in the sense that probably they won’t succeed in basic education. So, we’ve made individual plans for them. Our crafts teacher takes [these boys] with him so that they can work with him. Usually it’s something that is needed at school. They work in the crafts classroom; they plan their work, measure, and do it. There are all kinds of skills involved … Sometimes they study a certain subject as a part of the lesson, and then, they continue with their work in the crafts classroom. But, most importantly, they are working on something according to their strengths, crafts or maintenance. They are good at those kind of activities … so that they would succeed in something.” (S)

The flexible curriculum may be responsive to Sami cultural practices on boys’ upbringing (Boine and Saus 2012), but it also took into account

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

49

individual strengths. The boys were given an opportunity for success that they might not have experienced in more traditional classroom situations. Curriculum differentiation is considered as one the cornerstones of inclusive practice (Peterson and Hittie 2007). In Allin, all lower grade classes were composed of learners from several grades, and some subjects in the upper grades were taught in multi-grade classes, necessitating curriculum differentiation. Multi-grade teaching provides the learners with an opportunity to progress faster or to consolidate skills for a longer time. In multi-grade classes, the learners were supported by their peers. By changing the groupings from one task and lesson to another, teachers increased learners’ possibilities for interaction and inter-learning: “… I can see it from the grade 0 learners… they come to preschool [placed with grade 1 and 2 learners]. They learn pretty much of the content of grade 1 and 2. They even learn to read kind of accidentally.” [It is not expected that learners acquire reading skills before they enter grade 1]. (V)

Teachers also differentiated the curriculum by considering learning in terms of developing skills at the zone of proximity (Vygotsky 1978), as revealed in this account: “Every [learner] is on his or her individual level. There is no obligation that I must progress with every learner page by page in the same book and that everybody needs to know all [of] what is in there. In my daily work, what is important is to take into account the learner’s own skill level. And then, I try to find tasks that are suitable for the learner’s skill level, tasks that would boost self-esteem but wouldn’t be too difficult … but that would progress learning without being too easy.” (V)

Another noticeable way of enhancing learners’ participation in their learning was connecting content to the local context. This was evident in the flexible, individual plans made for boys who were at risk of dropping out (discussed above). In other schools, teaching was connected with life in the community. For instance, the curriculum content in environmental studies in grades 0–2 was integrated with handicrafts. Learners had prepared window decorations in the handicraft lessons (related to finemotor skills and colours). When the decorations were finalised, the learners visited the elderly people living in the vicinity and gave the decorations to them as presents (related to the topics of good manners and taking care of elderly people).

50

Chapter Three

Effective teaching practices in heterogeneous groups: Co-teaching Co-teaching is considered as an inclusive practice and a way of putting the value of collaboration into action. In my experience, co-teaching is particularly important in the context of few resources where very few specialised educational support services are available. Researchers suggest that teachers’ collaborative problem solving makes an impact on learning and that co-teaching helps teachers to improve their pedagogy because they can learn from one another and build their pedagogy on their shared expertise (Deppeler 2010; Ahtiainen, et al 2011). The municipality curriculum of Allin did not provide guidelines on coteaching. As a result, the teachers were free to set out their collaboration in such a way that best suited them. Co-teaching was used in three particular ways during the period of observations: “Multi-grade co-teaching was used in one of the schools where grade 0–2 teachers had decided to merge three classes into one with two teachers. As there were also pre-schoolers in the group, an assistant was recruited to the class to ensure that the pre-schoolers could play and rest enough during the day. Furthermore, a learner with a severe disability was accompanied by a personal assistant. Sometimes all four professionals were engaged with the whole group by supporting learners in their individual tasks. On other occasions, the teachers and assistants were assigned different roles: one teacher was working with two groups, while the other taught a certain topic to another group. Meanwhile, the assistants played social games with the rest of the learners.” (Observation notes)

A teacher and an assistant collaboration was the typical co-teaching form. Co-teaching in Finland usually means a teacher–teacher collaboration (Ahtiainen, et al 2011), but some researchers suggest that coteaching also includes arrangements where assistants have a clearly planned and defined role (Villa, Thousand and Nevin 2013). I take the latter position as my experience suggests that the collaboration between professionals of different educational background is particularly enriching. This type of co-teaching was used both in the lower and in the upper grades. The teacher was generally in charge of teaching the entire group, and the assistant was usually assigned the role of supporting behaviour or providing support to individuals. Teachers valued this kind of collaboration, although it was not always available (interview with H). The role of the assistants in supporting learners in the inclusive classroom has been a central topic of debate recently (e.g. Balshaw 2010;

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

51

Webster et al 2010), followed by findings of researchers such as Forlin (2012) who criticises that in many cases, untrained adults in the classroom are given the most challenging learners to be supported. In Finland, there are also views that “most assistants should be replaced by special teachers” (Saloviita 2012, para. 5.2). Nevertheless, many municipalities with meagre resources continue recruiting learning support assistants as this is economically more feasible and qualified special teachers may not be available. “Our learning assistants are our richness. They are all qualified and they are actively involved in in-service training. They have many professional skills to help … Our subject teachers would be often lost without them.” (L)

In Finland, an increasing number of teachers co-teach with a special teacher on a full-time or a part-time basis. In a context where most schools have to rely on itinerant special teachers, these professionals are not that likely to be seen as co-teachers. In Allin, one special teacher was placed at the “main school”, and she shared her experience of co-teaching: “I think we should get into a situation that there are several adults [in the classroom], and [teachers] could truly collaborate with other adults. It would be so important here, co-teaching, so that teachers would work with the special teacher in the classroom and wouldn’t feel that she’s an inspector or some kind of threat … With some teachers I can co-teach, and we can also split the groups in such a way that I teach half of the group and the subject teacher teaches the other half. But, I can feel my own limitations here, I can’t teach all [of] the upper grade subjects adequately. Sometimes I really feel that I can’t possibly teach mathematics so well.” (S)

A typical co-teaching lesson was organised by splitting the group, and both teachers worked alone with their group. The special teacher faced a dilemma when she was expected to provide support in all subjects, even in those subjects that she felt less skilled in. For professional development, parallel co-teaching method would be beneficial, as the subject teacher could be supported in pedagogy by the special teacher, and the special teacher in the subject knowledge by the subject teacher. In this way, coteaching could lead to the development of collaborative expertise that is much greater than individual expertise brought together (Hakkarainen and Paavola, 2006).

52

Chapter Three

Working with families Collaboration with families is set as one of the key elements of educational support (Opetushallitus 2010). The curriculum of Allin (Allin n.d.) states that the school supports homes in their responsibility of bringing up the child and that the school is responsible for education and supervision in the school environment. It further states that: “In order to achieve sustainable well-being, it is necessary that the parents/guardians are interested in and involved with the lives and studies of their own children and youth. It is important for the children and youth that the parents/guardians appreciate their work, studies.” (Allin, n.d., 163– 164).

The quote, which is an amendment of the National Core Curriculum, reveals direct instructions addressed to parents/guardians. As pointed out earlier, some teachers shared a perception that some parents/guardians lack interest in basic education. This perception seems to have permeated into the curriculum in the form of this reminder for parents. Generally, the trend in home-school partnerships has shifted from teachers using their professional power in telling parents what should be done with children to a situation whereby parents/guardians are regarded as the most knowledgeable educators of their children and from whom teachers can learn (Ashdown 2010). However, to some extent, it appeared as if the teachers did maintain a role of advising parents on what needs to be done. On the other hand, the teachers valued the support of parents/guardians: “I think parents’ support is essential. If parents are willing to help and support the school [in overcoming barriers to learning], then we’ll succeed. But if parents are not with us, or they don’t express their opinion or care, then we will fail.” (S)

The teachers also highlighted the benefits of the small school and village community in responding to and understanding individual needs. In this respect, interpersonal skills played a crucial role: “This is such a small community, so we have to be quite sensitive in the collaboration with parents. We all live here and meet at the shop and everywhere … so we have to maintain our relationships in such a way that we can also do something on leisure. So, it’s a kind of challenge.” (R) “Being a teacher in a small village school, it requires sensitivity. You can’t think that I just deal with my teaching … it’s so much more … There might be something happening in a learner’s family which makes an

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

53

impact on school—well, it happens in towns as well—but all this is accentuated here—the way in which we react and the way in which I personally feel.” (V)

Working with educational professionals In Allin, the resources for teaching and learning were within people themselves. Hence, collaboration with various educational professionals was present every day, especially with professionals working in other sectors in the municipality: “We have made all kinds of arrangements for learners [who are at risk of dropping out], all kinds of support, especially during this past year [2013]. We’ve set up workshops [and] arranged practice training at different work places; we’re co-operating with the youth outreach programme in this. We’ve an outreach worker, and he’s been very actively involved. So, we’ve created a kind of circle of support so that we’d manage to motivate these learners back to school, and I’m happy to say that it’s been quite successful.” (S)

The multi-professional assessment teams are required to be consulted when a learner does not benefit adequately from general and intensified support. The services of the multi-professional assessment teams were purchased from the provincial capital or from a resource school some 600 km away: “So, we have this distance meeting. At the other end, in Rovaniemi [the provincial capital], there are about 10 well-paid people. Doctors, and all kinds of specialists. And then here, we are about 10 people; so it’s very expensive when we could do it much more economically. And yet, those [learners] who need support, we could identify their needs here as well, without all this hassle.” (L)

The new educational support system has been operational since August 2011, but the experience of the usefulness of the expertise in the multiprofessional assessment teams has been ambiguous. It seems that the teams are merely used to fulfil the educational support regulations. However, in Allin, teachers could be supported with practical advice by the specialists in areas such as child and adolescent psychiatry or speech and language therapy as these services were not available in the municipality. Multi-professional collaboration seemed to function well locally, but the benefits of collaboration in more specialised services were obviously underutilised. As more experiences of these consultations are gathered, the emphasis should shift from the identification and diagnostics

54

Chapter Three

of learners’ needs to sharing expertise and finding practical solutions for pedagogical interventions; that is, after all, what teachers do at schools.

Conclusions The municipality of Allin has implemented inclusive education for more than 20 years. What can we learn from this experience in terms of teacher competencies? At the onset, the reasons behind inclusion might have been mainly economical, but the study shows evidence that there has been a shift from inclusion “by default” to a principled approach to educating all learners together. This shift can be attributed to teachers’ strong, context-related understanding of inclusion. Although teachers acknowledge that they “have to” accommodate all learners in their teaching groups, they also harness a range of resources among themselves and other professionals, as well as in the locality, in learners, in in-service training and through collaborative problem solving, to ensure the presence, participation and achievement of all. Resource mobilisation is also a fundamental aspect of inclusive school development according to Booth and Ainscow (2002).

Teacher competencies in small, rural schools In reflecting on their practice, the teachers emphasised flexibility and creativity. These characteristics may be individual, but they can also be developed as key professional skills. Teachers need to understand learner diversity, emanating from contextual and individual factors, and be able to identify barriers to learning within and around learners. Based on this understanding and identification, they have to invent flexible, innovative approaches that work out in their locality and culture. They build learning on learners’ strengths and actual level of skills or knowledge rather than assume learning needs based on age or progression with textbooks. In other words, they can apply learner-centred approaches. Managing heterogeneous groups is at the core of inclusive pedagogy. Social problems and disaffection may manifest in bad behaviour, and a range of classroom management strategies need to be developed. While one strategy may work with a certain group of learners, another strategy has to be designed for other groups. Coupled with classroom management skills, curriculum differentiation skills are essential. These include the ability to identify core and complementary contents, connect general contents to local conditions, adapt, adjust and modify pedagogy, as well as

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

55

having the courage to employ new methodologies and technologies. As teachers in one of the schools noted: “The most important quality of a teacher is the ability to work outside one’s own zone of convenience.” (T)

In the context of remote, rural schools, co-operative teaching skills and collaboration skills have particular value. The absence of additional educational support services necessitates collaboration on the part of teachers, other staff in the schools and other professionals. Effective collaboration does not function without effort, but instead calls for the clarification of goals and shared understanding of the nature of collaboration, creating meaningful ways of working and a sense of trust and mutual help. Furthermore, sensitivity in interpersonal relations, and respect for local cultures and traditions are needed.

Moving towards a principled approach to inclusive education With reference to the second research question, it is fair to conclude that inclusion “by default” can contribute to a principled approach to inclusive education under certain conditions. First, principled education authorities with a clear vision of inclusion at the municipality level can change attitudes from “we do because we must” to “we do because this is the right thing to do”. This does not mean that all teachers in Allin were enthusiastic about inclusive education. However, it seems that an adequately positive ethos for inclusion was maintained by consistently using positive language about educational support, recognising and acknowledging success and by giving teachers opportunities for professional development. It is noteworthy that, despite economic difficulties, the municipality had managed to keep class size small by recruiting teachers and a number of learning assistants. In each school, there was strong leadership promoting inclusion. All learners were welcome from the school’s catchment area. I believe that this attitude emanated from the sense of community. In a community where all people know one another, social pressure may also support schools in being responsible for the community. It is good for the school’s reputation to ensure that all learners can learn meaningfully, according to their potential. It is evident that teachers need support from school management for creative use of existing resources. The school managements maintained a “culture of success” by reinforcing an attitude that all problems can be solved. Instead of dwelling on difficulties, teachers were encouraged to problem-solve and develop innovations and experiments. Some of these

56

Chapter Three

innovations have been adopted as approaches for entire schools. The schools were also investing in teachers by organising staff activities outside of the school.

Emerging issues for teacher education In light of these preliminary findings, several questions arise. I will merely raise the questions, as I believe these issues have relevance in other teacher education institutions as well, and the context-appropriate responses needs to be designed locally.

Contextual understanding of inclusive education About half of the class of teachers graduating from the University of Lapland remain in the region. Most of them find employment in a few towns, but a number of novice teachers head to small villages. The rest of the graduates find employment elsewhere in the country, in villages, in towns or in main cities. Teacher education has a role to play in promoting a positive attitude towards inclusion and ensuring that students feel competent to face diversity. In this respect, we need to ask: How does teacher education help students to build a contextual understanding of inclusive education since teaching and learning settings are so diverse across the country?

Pedagogical encounters In reflecting upon their practice, the Allin teachers emphasised a holistic approach in responding to learners’ needs. This requires sincere interest in getting to know every learner. Interestingly, none of the interviewed teachers mentioned knowledge of special needs education as a necessary competence in their context; observations confirmed that teachers need solid pedagogical skills combined with good interaction in inclusive settings. Bronwyn and Gannon (2009) talk about “pedagogical encounters” as ethical, responsive and transformable spaces, where interaction between the teacher, the learner and the environment allows for surprises and reciprocal learning. Should we then study pedagogy or interaction? It seems that the challenge in teacher education is to create more spaces for personal and professional growth through “pedagogical encounters” where theory and practice can be connected in interaction and through interlearning.

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

57

Skills and teachers’ continuous professional development Taking further the idea of teaching being really about learning, then teaching skills can only be enhanced by teaching. It is not about doing the same thing year after year, but instead, about being able to reflect and analyse one’s own work and learn from that. Problem solving, which had an important role in the work of the teachers in Allin, is based on analysis of the situation and then devising diverse solutions. These solutions are based on experience, knowledge and skills, as well as exploration of new possibilities. For teacher education, the essential challenge is about building pedagogy of problem solving and reflection. In conclusion, it seems that the process of “becoming an inclusive teacher” stretches beyond teacher education. It depends strongly on educational authorities as well, as shown in this study. A constant “push and support” of teachers in the development of sound and principled approaches towards inclusion and the teaching profession can lead to a caring “neighbourhood school”.

Funding This study is a part of A School for All—Development of Inclusive Education—project, funded by the EU (Kolarctic ENPI CBC).

References Ahtiainen, R., M. Beirad, J. Hautamäki, T. Hilasvuori, and H. Thuneberg. 2011. Samanaikaisopetus on mahdollisuus. Tutkimus Helsingin pilottikoulujen uudistuvasta opetuksesta. Helsingin kaupunki: Opetusvirasto. Allin n.d. Allinin kunnan perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelma. http://www.xxx.fi/media/Allinin-kunnan-perusopetuksenopetussuunnitelma.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2013. Ashdown, R. 2010. The role of schools in establishing home-school partnerships. In Confronting obstacles to inclusion. International responses to developing inclusive education, ed. R. Rose, 89–100. Oxford: Routledge. Autti, A. and T. Mella, eds. 2012. Lapin yliopiston kasvatustieteiden tiedekunta. Opinto-opas 2012–14. http://www.ulapland.fi/loader.aspx?id=d6b1d3d7-3913-4d19-9a21ae7c4f802c8e.

58

Chapter Three

Balshaw, M. 2010. Looking for some different answers about teaching assistants. European Journal of Special Needs Education European Journal of Special Needs Education 25 (4): 337–338. Basic Education Act. 2010. Laki perusopetuslain muuttamisesta 624/2010. http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/2010/20100642. Accessed 13 June 2013. Boine, E.M. and M. Saus. 2012. Saamelaisten isien kasvatusstrategioita.In Koulu ja pohjoisen pojat, ed. A. Lauriala, 69–85. Rovaniemi: Lapin yliopistokustannus. Booth, T, and M. Ainscow. 2002. Index for inclusion. Developing learning and participation in schools. Bristol: CSIE. Bronwyn, D, and S. Gannon eds. 2009. Pedagogical encounters. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Deppeler, J. 2012. Professional learning as collaborative inquiry. Working together for impact. In Teacher education for inclusion. Changing paradigms and innovative approaches, ed. C. Forlin, 180–188. Oxford: Routledge. European Agency for the Development of Special Needs Education (EADSNE). 2012. Profile of inclusive teachers. Odense: European Agency for the Development of Special Needs Education. Faculty of Education, University of Lapland. Strategy 2020. 2007. http://www.ulapland.fi/loader.aspx?id=b6e0fcff–dacf-4a4c-98cb78f755c09031 Accessed 15 August 2013. Forlin, C. 2012. Diversity and its challenges for teachers. In Future directions for inclusive teacher education. An international perspective, ed. C . Forlin, 83–92. Oxford: Routledge. Fuchs, D, L.S. Fuchs, and D.L. Compton. 2012. Smart RTI: A nextgeneration approach to multilevel prevention. Exceptional Children 78 (3): 263–279. Hakkarainen, K. and S. Paavola. 2006. Kollektiivisen asiantuntijuuden mahdollisuuksia ja rajoja-kognitiotieteellinen näkökulma. In Kollektiivinen asiantuntijuus, ed. J. Parviainen, 214–272. Tampere: Tampereen yliopiston yliopistopaino. Helve, H. 1998. ed. Unification and marginalisation of young people. Finnish Youth Research 2000 Programme. Helsinki: The Finnish Youth Research Society. Kuusela, J. 2006. Temaattisia näkökulmia opetuksen tasa–arvoon. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Lahelma, E. and T. Gordon. 2007. Taustoja, lähtökohtia ja avauksia kouluetnografiaan. In Etnografia metodologiana. Lähtökohtana

A Glance at Inclusion in a Small Finnish Community

59

koulutuksen tutkimus, ed. S. Lappalainen, P. Hynninen, T. Kankkunen, E. Lahelma and T.Tolonen, 17–38. Tampere: Vastapaino. Lakkala, S. and H. Thuneberg. 2012. Inkluusioon tähtäävä koulunuudistus. Kyselytutkimus Lapin kehittämisverkkohankkeen kunnissa. In Hippuja ja oivalluksia. Kohti osallistavaa koulua Lapissa, by Lapin kehittämisverkkohanke 2009–2012, 8–39. Rovaniemi: Lapin kehittämisverkkohanke 2009–2012. Lauriala, A. 2012. Johdanto.In Koulu ja pohjoisen pojat, ed A. Lauriala, 13–19. Rovaniemi: Lapin yliopistokustannus. LeCompte, M. D, and J. Preissle.1993. Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research, 2nd edn. San Diego: Academic Press Malinen, O-P., H. Savolainen, P. Engelbrecht and J. Xu. 2010. Inklusiivisen opetuksen kansainvälinen ja vertaileva tutkimus. Kasvatus 41 (4): 351–362. [Finnish] Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC). 2012. Ehdotus valtioneuvoston strategiaksi koulutuksellisen tasa–arvon edistämiseksi. Helsinki: Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriön työryhmämuistioita ja selvityksiä 2012: 28. [Finnish] Ministry of Education (MoE). 2007. Erityisopetuksen strategia. Opetusministeriön työryhmämuistioita ja selvityksiä 2007 :17. Helsinki: Opetusministeriö. [Finnish] National Board of Education (NBE) 2011. The School of Opportunities: Towards every learner's full potential.. http://www.oph.fi/download/134584_the_school_of_opportunities.pdf Accessed 13 June 2013. —. 2013. Erityinen tuki. 2013. http://www.oph.fi/saadokset_ja_ohjeet/ohjeita_koulutuksen_jarjestami seen/perusopetuksen_jarjestaminen/tietoa_tuen_jarjestamisesta/erityine n_tuki. Last modified 10 April 2013. Accessed 15 August 2013. Official Statistics of Finland (OSF). 2013. Special education [epublication]. http://www.stat.fi/til/erop/tup_en.html. Accessed 7 August 2013. Opetushallitus. 2010. Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelman perusteiden muutokset ja täydennykset. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Pascale, C-M. 2011. Cartographies of knowledge. Exploring qualitative epistemologies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Peterson, J.M, and M. Hittie. 2003. Inclusive teaching. Creating effective schools for all learners. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. — 2007. Inclusive teaching: The journey towards effective schools for all learners, 2nd edn. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

60

Chapter Three

Regional Council of Lapland. n.d. Lapland in Figures 2012–2013. Rovaniemi: Regional Council of Lapland. Saloviita, T. 2012. Inkluusio eli "osallistava kasvatus". http://users.jyu.fi/~saloviit/tutkimus/inclusion.html. Last modified 9 June. Accessed 13 August 2013. Saloviita, T. and M. Takala. 2010. Frequency of co–teaching in different teacher categories. European Journal of Special Needs Education 24 (4): 389–396. Työllisyyskatsaukset - Lappi. 2013. ELY-keskukset. http://www.elykeskus.fi/web/ely/ely-lappiyollisyyskatsaukset?p_p_id=122_INSTANCE_aluevalinta&p_p_lifecy cle=0&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&p_r_p_564233524_reset Cur=true&p_r_p_564233524_categoryId=14253#.UhYVtH8hOa8. Accessed 22 August 2013. UNESCO. 2009. Policy guidelines on inclusion in education. Paris: UNESCO. —. 2012. Addressing exclusion in education. A Guide to assessing education systems towards more inclusive and just societies. Paris: UNESCO. Villa, R.A., J.S. Thousand and A.I. Nevin. 2013. A Guide to co-teaching. New lessons and strategies for facilitating student learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin. Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind in society. The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Väyrynen, S. 2006. Kuka kuuluu mukaan ja mitä arvostetaan? Esimerkki osallistavien ja ei-osallistavien käytänteiden suhteista suomalaisessa ja eteläafrikkalaisessa koulussa.Kasvatus 37 (4): 371–385. —. 2012. Kuntokoulusta lähikouluun. Psykososiaalisesti oirehtivan oppilaan tuki lähikoulussa.In Hippuja ja oivalluksia. Kohti osallistavaa koulua Lapissa by Lapin kehittämisverkkohanke 2009–12, 40–51. Rovaniemi: Lapin kehittämisverkosthanke 2009–12. Webster, R., P. Blatchford, P. Bassett, P. Brown, C. Martin and A. Russell. 2010 Double standards and first principles: framing teaching assistant support for pupils with special educational needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education 25 (4): 319–336.

CHAPTER FOUR LESSONS LEARNT FROM TRAINING FULL SERVICE SCHOOL AND LEARNING SUPPORT EDUCATORS JEAN V. FOURIE AND ELIZABETH HOOIJER

Introduction Inclusive education as described in Education White Paper Six: Special Needs Education: Building an Inclusive Education and Training System (EWP6) (Department of Education (DoE) 2001) requires a change in how education is understood and managed. An inclusive education system is conceived to enable education structures, systems and teaching and learning methodologies to meet the needs of diverse learners. During 2011 and 2012 the University of Johannesburg partnered with the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE) in the training of Full Service School and Special School educators, district officials and Learning Support Educators (LSEs) in inclusive education. This training was needed to empower educators in supporting the large numbers of learners who experience barriers to learning in both special and mainstream public schools. The Department of Basic Education (DBE) reported that in 2010, Gauteng province accommodated 16,123 learners who experience disabilities in mainstream public schools (Meyers 2012). Of these, 3,726 learners attend separate classes within mainstream schools and 12,397 attend mainstream classes (ibid.). There is also a much larger group of learners without disabilities, who experience a range of other barriers to learning who also require support. Training of educators in mainstream, full service and special schools is vital in providing an inclusive education system that supports all learners. Ntombela (2011) cites several international studies noting that the attitude of teachers to inclusion will determine the level of their commitment to inclusive practices in their classrooms. She further states that the paradigm shift required to implement inclusive practices is more than a change in

62

Chapter Four

service delivery and therefore it is imperative to train and support educators intensively during this process. This chapter describes some of the lessons learnt while training these educators.

Policy framework The training was underpinned by the inclusive education policy. Inclusive education in South Africa is set against the international movement in the early 1990s which began with the paradigmatic change concerning special needs education. The World Conference on Special Needs Education held in 1994 in Spain, produced the Salamanca Statement with the guiding principle that: “Schools should accommodate all learners regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions” (UNESCO 1994) This conference provided a vision for the creation of an inclusive education system in South Africa from a human rights perspective. This declaration paved the way for the publication of the “Quality Education for All” report by the National Commission on Special Educational Needs and Training and the National Committee on Education Support Services (DoE 1997). This report stated: “The central challenge facing education is that of recognising and addressing the different or diverse needs of the entire learner population and minimising, removing and preventing barriers to learning and development, thereby promoting effective learning among all learners.” (DoE 1997, 2)

The report also used the concept of “barriers to learning and development rather than “special needs” and proposed a systemic human rights view of barriers to learning rather than the medical deficit model where barriers to learning were seen as being located within the child only. Furthermore EWP6 (DoE 2001), as part of the South African legislative response to inclusive education, states that all education structures and systems, including the curriculum and learning methodologies, must ensure that diverse learning needs are met and that barriers to learning are minimised. It also promotes a systemic view of support by declaring that changes should be made to mainstream education so that learners experiencing barriers to learning can be identified and supported. As a signatory to the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN 2007), South Africa is obliged to recognise the rights of, and provide equal opportunities for all; at all levels of the education system without discrimination. This convention also declared

Lessons Learnt from Training School and Learning Support Educators

63

that persons with disabilities may not be excluded from the general education system but that reasonable accommodations should be provided, including individualised support where necessary, to facilitate effective participation in the education system. Furthermore, the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) (DBE 2011) states that inclusivity should “become a central part of the organization, planning and teaching at each school.” EWP6 envisaged a 20 year implementation plan whereby current special schools would become Resource Centres and approximately 500 schools around the country would be converted into Full Service Schools (DoE 2001). The National Strategy on Screening, Identification, Assessment and Support (SIAS) document describes the support needs as being able to be identified at different levels ranging from low levels of support to moderate and high levels of support (DoE 2008). Categories of disability should no longer be used to determine the levels of support needed by a particular learner but rather the intensity of support required by each individual learner to be able to participate in the learning process. The ability of a school to adjust and cater for different levels of support and participation will ultimately determine their ability to become inclusive schools. Learners with low to moderate intensity support needs would require planned adaptations to teaching and learning strategies, attitudes and culture of the school with the help of the School Based Support Team (SBST) so as to allow for some participation in the learning process. Learners with high support needs may require specialised support or learning programmes managed with the assistance of the District Based Support Team (DBST) to ensure some participation on the learning process. It is envisioned that most learners with low intensity support needs would be catered for in mainstream schools while others would attend Full Service Schools within their district or region as defined in EWP6. Learners described here as being in need of high intensity support might be catered for in Special Schools as Resource Centres. While established Special Schools will continue to support learners with high intensity needs, their role will change so that the expertise of the specialised staff and therapists at these schools can also be of benefit to educators in mainstream schools (DoE 2005). Full Service Schools are being established within each educational district. They are essentially mainstream schools that provide quality education to all learners by providing appropriate support for learners, irrespective of disability, and addressing the full range of learning needs in an equitable manner (DBE 2010).

64

Chapter Four

Learning Support Educators (LSEs) While the GDE recognises that all learners are able to learn, they also acknowledge that there are some learners who will require intensive and on-going support to overcome various barriers to learning. The GDE envisages that support would be provided to mainstream schools and educators primarily through the district support personnel which includes various therapists, psychologists, health and welfare professionals as well as Learning Support Educators (LSEs) (Landsberg 2011). Mahlo (2011) defines LSEs as educators with special competencies to support learners, educators and the whole system to ensure effective learning by all learners. Some of these educators were previously known as “remedial”, “aid” or “special class” educators. Mahlo (2011) further states that an LSE is a qualified teacher with the relevant experience and expertise in the field of special needs, remedial education and with a background in inclusive education. The role of LSEs has been defined by GDE policy and can broadly be described as serving mainstream educators in a coaching, mentoring, supportive and training capacity in order to address barriers to learning in classrooms. This role includes advising educators on individual learner support through designing guidelines for curriculum differentiation, adaptations to learning programmes, advising on alternative methodologies and assisting educators in the development of Individual Learning Support Programmes (ILSPs). Furthermore according to the GDE (2014), LSEs will now largely be based at Full Service Schools and provide remedial support to learners identified at these schools by means of the pull out system. LSEs must also help schools identify learners who need to be granted special concessions for alternative or adapted assessment. They also need to act as the resource person to the SBST for developing strategies to address barriers experienced by the learners through accumulating support programmes, materials, and other relevant information. This role also involves the writing of reports and consulting with a range of stakeholders, including the parents, various professionals and support agencies so that effective support can be rendered to all learners.

Training programme Ntombela (2011) recommends that all educators need to be trained on what barriers to learning are and how to address them through the use of classroom strategies that promote inclusion.

Lessons Learnt from Training School and Learning Support Educators

65

A training programme that covers areas of inclusive education and barriers to learning was designed by the University of Johannesburg to train and empower these educators to fulfil their roles. The training programme was divided into four modules over one year. The content of the programme was built around different themes including: the theories and principles underpinning inclusive education; the use of different screening tools in the identification of barriers to learning and the referral processes that can be put in place to access collaboration and community support. Training also incorporated how the education system as a whole can support learners with physical, sensory, health and neurological disabilities and impairments, as well as intellectual differences, learning difficulties and emotional problems. Additionally, supporting childhood social and behavioural difficulties, contextual disadvantages and the developing of parent/community school partnerships in supporting diverse learners were also included. Specialised content was designed particularly for LSEs and included computerised systems for managing barriers to learning; curriculum differentiation and adapted alternative assessment practices; the developing of ILSPs as well as the ability to work in school-based collaborative teams to find solutions and overcome various barriers to learning. The training programme specifically addressed the evaluation and assessment of learners experiencing barriers to learning. Practical work required educators to assess a learner and to design a meaningful support programme for that learner which reflected the elements of the SIAS document (DoE 2008). The training took place at different venues and times throughout the year. Some educators and officials attended training sessions once a month on a Saturday at the University of Johannesburg’s Auckland Park Campus. Three other groups were accommodated at different satellite venues; the University of Johannesburg’s Soweto Campus, Matthew Goniwe School of Leadership in Benoni and at a venue in Wonderboom, Pretoria. Lectures at these satellite venues were held during the week and educators attended on average three times per month. Appropriate core lecturers were appointed and guest lecturers with specific expertise in their fields of knowledge were invited to provide specialist workshops.

Data collection and analysis A questionnaire was designed and handed out in the first lecture. The purpose of this questionnaire was to determine baseline knowledge of the

66

Chapter Four

educators about the topics offered in the training programme and it was distributed again in the last session to gauge the effectiveness of the training. The questionnaire was based on foundational knowledge that educators in Full Service Schools and LSEs would require in fulfilling their roles as determined by the GDE. Sample questions included: “What do you understand by the terms ‘Inclusion’, ‘Inclusive Education’ and ‘Social Justice’?” and “What is an ‘Individual Learning Support Programme’ (ILSP)?” The responses to the initial questionnaire were used as a guide to plan the content of the training programme whereas the responses to the final questionnaire and the results of the assignments were used to evaluate the training. Each educator was also required to complete four assignments during the course of the year. Data was analysed using a constant comparative method in order to determine recurring and salient themes across the various data sources (Merriam 2009). Credibility of the themes was upheld by triangulating themes found in the questionnaires and assignments. Ethical guidelines were adhered to by obtaining informed consent from all educators in the training programme. During 2011, 200 educators from Full Service Schools and 160 Special School as Resource Centre educators were trained. A further 360 Full Service School educators and 216 Special School as Resource Centre educators, 40 District Officials and 250 LSEs representing all 15 districts in Gauteng, were trained during 2012. Educators who completed the training received Certificates of Completion. There were about 20 educators who needed an extension to complete the assignment tasks which resulted in these educators receiving their certificates at a later date.

Lessons learnt from the training programme There were several major logistical challenges for the lecturers in managing such large numbers of educators. One of these challenges was matching the educators with a venue and training sessions that best suited their particular circumstances as some of the educators encountered difficulties with transport in getting to the venues. Other challenges included allaying union concerns and ensuring lecture times were workable for educators. In addition, marking such large numbers of assignments was quite a formidable task and assignments needed to be marked within tight deadlines. Managing the submission of late assignments and plagiarism issues was also challenging.

Lessons Learnt from Training School and Learning Support Educators

67

One of the criteria for obtaining a Certificate of Completion at the end of the programme was an overall attendance of 80% throughout the year. This meant that accurate attendance records needed to be kept and handed in after each session so that any absentees could be followed up by GDE officials. The GDE had nominated the different educators for the training and contracted with them to attend the lectures and submit assignments. In general the educators responded well to the training and enjoyed the focused nature of the content and the expertise of the presenters. Although at first some educators were reluctant to attend, they generally found it fruitful. Comments such as, “I learnt a lot” and “There is so much I can do for a learner before I give up” showed their appreciation of the training. Naicker (2000) suggests that many educators in South Africa might still be influenced by some aspects of the old paradigm of special education and still need to make the shift to one of inclusive education. From the responses to the final questionnaire it was evident that most of the educators’ understanding of inclusion had expanded. A number of educators responded with comments about inclusive education such as: “Inclusive education is the type of education that educates all learners with or without disability.” “… teaching learners with diverse learning abilities in the same class” “… admitting learners with or without barriers”.

While a number of educators in mainstream schools are attempting to support these learners by adapting the curriculum, teaching methods and assessment strategies, there were many educators who felt they are not able to assist such learners and found the task quite overwhelming. Mahlo (2011) confirms that many educators have not received training to work with learners with different needs and consequently these educators feel unable to support these learners adequately. Unfortunately there were also some educators who for various reasons were resistant to inclusion. Several LSEs stated in their assignments that the class teachers did not feel that it was their responsibility to support learners experiencing barriers to learning. They reported that these class teachers just wanted the learners to be placed at special schools. The class teachers were fairly negative with having to accommodate learners experiencing barriers to learning in their classrooms. Reflecting this resistance are comments such as: “Unfortunately members of staff are negative because they say they don’t have the time to support learners in their classes.”

68

Chapter Four “Tom’s school needs to be more proactive in educating the teaching staff regarding inclusion and encourage the acceptance of inclusion including the concept that all children are different with different needs.”

Most educators however, agreed that “No learner should be excluded,” and that “No learner should be isolated as we are living in a democratic country” and “all learners can achieve if provided with support”. Some educators commented that “learners with severe difficulties,” “those with intellectual challenges,” “high needs” or those needing “intensive support” should not be included in ordinary schools. Some educators also included learners with visual and hearing disabilities in the group of learners who should not be included. The main reason given for this was that “learners with these barriers cannot be effectively accommodated as very few educators are qualified to be able to work with them”. For inclusion to be successful in any setting, collaboration between all the role players is essential and effective support can only occur when all participants in the process share their expertise and knowledge voluntarily (Swart and Pettipher 2011). Most of the educators realised the importance of collaboration and multi-disciplinary teamwork in overcoming different barriers to learning. One educator mentioned that: “Positive collaboration occurred and the teacher co-operated in supporting the child” and that they had “to work hand in hand with parents, the district and other stakeholders.” Another educator commented that, “If all stakeholders get together for the sake of the child adequate support can be given.” Educators from the same schools or districts learnt to know each other and began to collaborate with each other to solve problems and share information and ideas. This was revealed by comments about learning: “Teamwork is very important in supporting the learner.” “I saw how other educators and LSEs are dealing with learning barriers.”

Email addresses were exchanged and some of the educators formed cluster groups which met regularly to discuss different cases and generally support each other. “Inclusion is seen as a process of addressing and responding to the diversity of needs of all learners through increasing participation in learning, cultures and communities, and reducing exclusion within and from education” (UNESCO 2003). Most educators attested to the fact that their knowledge base had increased, as seen by the following comments: “I have grown in my learning support, my approach to teaching has changed for the better.”

Lessons Learnt from Training School and Learning Support Educators

69

“I now understand better different types of disabilities and learning barriers.”

They had learned, “different strategies to assist learner in reading, writing, mathematics,” and “about other learning disabilities, dyslexia and autism”. The following comments also revealed an improved attitude towards support: “Supporting the learning process of the child by providing different opportunities for them to learn.” “I can now go back to the classroom and better understand my learners.” “I learnt a lot, doors have opened for me to be able to help children”. “I need to love and accommodate all kinds of learners placed under my care.” “All learners are able to learn but at their own pace.”

In general, most of the educators who participated in the training programme valued the training provided as reflected by the following comments: “As an educator I need to change my behaviour, methodologies, curricula and the environment to meet all the needs of the learner.” “I learnt to fully embrace differentiation and diversity when practising and providing support using inclusivity practices and lovingly show how every learner is special in their own and unique special ways.”

The assignment tasks set by the lecturers were demanding and time consuming. Many of the educators felt quite intimidated by the programme when they realised that they would be expected to complete assignments but the assignments were eventually done enthusiastically. Generally the standard of the assignments handed in by the educators was high, implementation of their learning from the training was observable and the educators devised innovative ILSPs to support learners with a wide range of barriers. The ILSPs devised, included supporting learners with autism, epilepsy, dyslexia, cerebral palsy, visual and auditory impairment, cognitive impairments, attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD), foetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and multiple sclerosis (MS).

70

Chapter Four

The assignments also revealed some of the challenges experienced by educators in public schools when attempting to support learners. Overcrowded classrooms were a common feature as educators reported working in classrooms with 60, 65 and even 70 learners at a time. The educators in these classes were understandably reluctant to implement support strategies as there was often not enough space in the classroom to effectively organise group work. Educators also reported that in some schools computers supplied by the GDE online project had been stolen, or had been locked away for safekeeping or were not used as personnel had not yet been trained on how to use this technology. Although the South African Schools Act (Republic of South Africa 1996) gives clear guidelines on the age cohorts for each grade, educators stated that the age of learners was often the barrier to learning. Some of the learners had been admitted to school at an age too young for learning resulting in their not being “school ready” and then experienced barriers to learning. Meanwhile there were also learners who were three or four years older than their peers in the class and tended to be ignored by their educators. There were cases reported of learners who had repeated a grade three times before anybody attempted to identify the barriers to learning. In the South African context many learners experience barriers to learning due to language issues. There were many cases reported where a learner was learning in a language that was not the home language and was sometimes the child’s third or fourth language. This problem was exacerbated when learners began their schooling at one school in one Language of Learning and Teaching (LOLT) and then changed schools the next year only to find that the LOLT at that school was different from that of the previous school. These cases confirm the findings of Mahlo (2011) who also articulated that young learners and their difficulties relating to the LOLT of the school had a negative impact on the implementation of inclusive practices. In the training programme, the various assistive devices and therapies that are available to support learners were discussed. However these devices and therapies are seldom available to learners in schools as noted by Makoelle (2012, 98), who stated that: “As a developing country, South Africa experiences problems in providing transport, welfare, health services and other basic needs to all its children. Those who cannot access such services are faced with difficulties as there is little support for schooling.”

This view was supported in part as quite a few educators reported in their assignments and in class discussions that many of the schools they were supporting had very few resources available to them. Some schools

Lessons Learnt from Training School and Learning Support Educators

71

and learners had no access to speech or occupational therapists and sometimes not even to medical specialists, such as optometrists, to assist their learners. In the questionnaire given after the training there were many educators reporting lack of knowledge and ignorance regarding high level barriers. The assignments also highlighted that some educators were still confused by terminology. In particular, some educators used the terms cognitive impairment, learning disabilities, ADHD, and behaviour problems interchangeably which often compromised the support programme implemented for those learners. Furthermore such inaccurate diagnoses occasionally resulted in incorrect placement referrals to special schools. Some of the assignments raised the sensitive issue of cultural belief. In some communities certain categories of disabilities are still regarded as taboo or even as a punishment or curse. Some educators reported that because of this, a child had not received the correct assistance to overcome the barrier. In particular, learners with epilepsy and cerebral palsy appeared to fall into this category. Unfortunately the correct medical treatment had sometimes not been obtained and any recommendations for this type of support were ignored by the child’s family because of their particular beliefs. Timmons and Muthukrishna (2008) agreed with some of these challenges. They also cite a lack of human resource development, poverty, inadequate support services, language and communication and exclusionary practices as challenges that need to be addressed in the South African socio-cultural and educational context.

Conclusion Moving inclusion forward represents much more than just the physical placement of learners experiencing difficulties in mainstream schools. It involves the development of an inclusive philosophy which then raises crucial questions about the systemic changes necessary for schools to become fully inclusive. The Department of Basic Education sees educators with expertise in supporting learners experiencing barriers to learning as playing an important role in assisting class teachers and enabling all learners to participate in the learning process (DBE 2010). Full Service Schools are being established throughout Gauteng and these schools are to become the role models for South African inclusive schools. The strategies developed and implemented in supporting learners experiencing barriers to learning will be used to chart the way for other schools to develop the

72

Chapter Four

capacity to respond to the diversity of learners in their local communities. Many special schools are also embracing their new roles as resource centres offering services and sharing information with ordinary schools in their areas. This chapter outlines some of the lessons learnt during the training of educators in moving inclusive education forward in South Africa. In general the knowledge base of the educators who participated in the training had increased. There was a better understanding of both systemic barriers to learning and internal barriers within the learner. This resulted in a wide range of barriers being supported by the LSEs and Full Service Schools. On the other hand there were a number of challenges reported by the educators in the training such as: cultural beliefs, overcrowded classes, language issues and lack of resources. As with any training programme there were logistical difficulties such as appointing appropriate lecturers, marking large numbers of assignments and record keeping which needed to be addressed and managed effectively. Despite the challenges experienced, the training programme was valued by most of the educators. Some of the educators suggested that, “the course should be made compulsory,” and “a one year course was not sufficient.” Many educators enquired about studying further as they had become more aware of the fact that becoming more inclusive is a process and that lifelong learning was an essential element of being an effective educator. Overall, the training programme has contributed towards moving inclusive education one step forward in Gauteng.

Acknowledgements The project team of the Faculty of Education at the University of Johannesburg would like to thank the Directorate of Inclusion and Special Services at the Gauteng Department of Education for the opportunity to be involved in this training. Despite the numerous logistical challenges, it was a privilege for us to be part of the process of establishing Full Service Schools, strengthening Special Needs Schools and training Learning Support Educators as envisioned in the Education White Paper Six (DoE 2001), and in building a quality, inclusive education system.

Lessons Learnt from Training School and Learning Support Educators

73

References Department of Basic Education (DBE). 2011. National curriculum statement (NCS.) Curriculum and assessment policy statement. Foundation Phase grades 1–3 English home language. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education. —. 2010. Guidelines for full-service/inclusive schools. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education. Department of Education (DoE). 1997. Quality education for all: Overcoming barriers to learning and development. Report of the National Commission on Special Needs in Education and Training and the National Committee on Education Support Services. Pretoria: Department of Education. —. 2001. Education White Paper Six. Special needs education: Building an inclusive education and training system. Pretoria: Department of Education. —. 2005. Conceptual and operational guidelines for the implementation of inclusive education: Special schools as resource centres. Pretoria: Department of Education. —. 2008. National strategy on screening, identification, assessment and support: School pack. Pretoria: Department of Education. Gauteng Department of Education (GDE). 2014. Memo: The roles and responsibilities of learning support educators (LSEs) in full service schools. Johannesburg: Office of the DDG-CMD. Landsberg, E. 2011. Learning support. In Addressing barriers to learning: A South African perspective, 2nd edn., eds. E. Landsberg, D. Krüger and E Swart. 61–77. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers. Mahlo, F.D. 2011. Experiences of learning support educators in the Foundation Phase with reference to the implementation of inclusive education in Gauteng. Doctoral dissertation, University of South Africa. Makoelle, T.M. 2012. The state of inclusive pedagogy in South Africa: A literature review. Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 3 (2): 93–102. Meyers, A. 2012. (Acting Director: Inclusion and Special Schools Directorate, Gauteng Department of Education). Speech given at Short Learning Programmes (Inclusion) certificate presentations for the project on training of Full Service Teachers, Resource Centres and Learning Support Educators, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, November, 2012.

74

Chapter Four

http://www.inabook.co.za/Other/Inclusion%20and%20Special%20Serv ices%20Directorate%20Speech%20UJ%20Certification%20Anthony% 20Meyers.pdfAccessed 27 August 2014. Merriam, S.B. 2009. Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Franciso: Jossey–Bass Publishers. Naicker, S.M. 2000. From apartheid education to inclusive education: The challenge of transformation. International Education Summit for a Democratic Society. Detroit: Wayne State University. Ntombela, S. 2011. The progress of inclusive education in South Africa: Teachers’ experiences in a selected district, KwaZulu-Natal. Improving Schools, 14 (1): 5–14. doi: 10.1177/1365480210390082. Republic of South Africa. 1996. South African Schools Act, 1996. Act No 84 of 1996. Government Gazette 377 (17579) Cape Town: Government Printing Works. Swart, E. and R. Pettipher. 2011. A framework for understanding inclusion. In Addressing barriers to learning: A South African perspective, 2nd edn., eds. E. Landsberg, D. Krüger and E. Swart, 3– 25. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers. Timmons, V. and N Muthukrishna. 2008. Inclusive education—A global perspective: Insights from Canada and South Africa. Paper presented at the 13th IASSID World Congress, 25th – 30th August 2008. Cape Town, South Africa. United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). 1994. The Salamanca Statement and framework for action on special needs education. Paris: UNESCO. —. 2003. Overcoming exclusion through inclusive approaches in education: A challenge and vision. Conceptual Paper. Paris: UNESCO. United Nations General Assembly. 2007. Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: Resolution adopted by the General Assembly, A/RES/61/106.

CHAPTER FIVE ENGRAINING INCLUSIVE PEDAGOGY: THE ROLE OF TEACHER EDUCATORS IN THE PRACTICUM AND BEYOND VIJAYA DHARAN

Introduction Inclusion is a word that connotes wholesomeness, but it is often heard in relation to issues that are contentious, divisive and polarising in the field of education. Put simply, yet powerfully, inclusion is about how we treat one another (Nutbrown, Clough and Atherton 2010). Over the years, the term inclusive education has shifted from supporting the learning and access to the curriculum of those with special or additional needs to encompassing the diversity of students (ethnicity, race, culture, gender, religion, class, faith, spirituality, and sexuality). However, what has remained staunch over the years among scholars, researchers and advocates of inclusive education is an agreement that inclusive education is about equitable and socially just practices (Banks and Banks 1995; Skiba et al 2008; Thomas and Loxley 2007; Zeichner 1993). Inclusion is about all students having access to, participating in, and belonging to schools in the communities where they live (Ainscow and Booth 2000; Florian 2011; Sebba and Ainscow 1996). Ballard (1995, quoted in Sebba and Ainscow 1996) observes that the process of inclusion has no limits and refutes the notion of inclusive schools. Implied in this notion is that all schools can develop and improve practices that equally welcome and support the learning of all students in their communities. Inclusion, he argues, is an international movement that has gained momentum by showing that it is possible to educate all students, irrespective of their sensory, cognitive or social and emotional difficulties, in mainstream classroom settings. Fundamentally, inclusive education is about pedagogy for all students—not only those with impairments or identified as having special educational needs—but for all students vulnerable to exclusionary

76

Chapter Five

pressures (Ainscow and Booth 2000; Meyer et al 1998). It involves recognising and valuing the diversity that exists in schools and communities (Ballard 1996). Such acknowledgement of education for all in their own communities does not happen through trial and error. It requires among others: x Definitions of inclusion which document the broad scope of the inclusion agenda—from an initial concern with special educational needs to a broad diversity agenda x The nature of knowledge needed by teachers, and how teachers acquire this knowledge x Key challenges in reforming initial teacher education programmes (Florian 2011, 319). Given the rapidly changing demographic landscape of classrooms, it is also imperative that inclusive education has a broader scope that is intertwined with the tenets of multicultural education and sharing the essential principles of equity pedagogy (Ainscow et al 2012; Banks and Banks 1995; Meyer et al 2010). The nature of diversity in classrooms also forces us to move beyond traditional discourses based on disabilities, to ensuring that teachers acquire competence, skills and knowledge to ensure that all students participate meaningfully in their education (Miles and Singal 2010; Sleeter and Grant 2009). Schools that are truly inclusive are those that view differences between staff and students as a resource; have a commitment and belief in being inclusive; have leaders who can create an ethos of understanding and appreciation; and structural supports that foster respect and collaboration among the school community of learners (Kugelmass and Ainscow 2004). In New Zealand, while teacher training exposes prospective teachers to courses on diversity/special education, no provider has an explicit policy on inclusion other than signalling this in their graduate profile (O’Neill, Bourke and Kearney 2009). In addition, widening the notion of inclusion from special education to include all aspects of differences and diversity of learners has not only posed “major challenges to teaching and teacher education” (589); it has also exposed the lack of a clear vision in terms of inclusive education in teacher education programmes (Kane 2005). In a study of initial teacher education (ITE) providers, Morton and Gordon (2006) found that there was a wide range of descriptions for inclusion in theory and practice, which can result in trainee teachers having an unclear view of being inclusive practitioners. This trend can be unproductive as it is imperative that inclusive education underpins the preparation of teachers

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

77

if educational equity is to be achieved (Florian, Young and Rouse 2010). As Darling-Hammond (2000, 171) notes, “The capacity to understand another is not innate; it is developed through study, reflection, guided experience and inquiry”. Therefore, if we are to facilitate inclusive practices in schools, seeds need to be firmly sown and germinated in ITE and nurtured in partnership with schools and their local communities. While novice teachers may not be in a position to effect immediate changes to practices in schools, their teacher education must prepare them to have the know-how to ensure that there is equity in their responsiveness to diversity (Florian 2009). However, it is also important to bear in mind that even when university courses have an unwavering focus on issues of equity, the learning experiences trainees gain during their practicum have a stronger and often long-lasting impact (Proctor and Niemeyer 2001; Walshaw 2007).

Inclusion and teacher trainees While overarching policies and legislation on special and inclusive education are based on particular ideologies and philosophies, the most enduring prerequisites for inclusive practices are teacher beliefs and attitudes. The prevalence of a tentative attitude of both novice and experienced teachers towards students with special needs has been well researched (Avramidis, Bayliss and Burden 2000; Avramidis and Norwich 2002; Bratlinger 1996; Garriott, Miller and Snyder 2003; Kagan 1992; Pajares 1992; Richardson 1996). Pajares (1992) and Kagan (1992) took the stance that teacher beliefs are relatively stable, while Richardson (1996) contended that inherent beliefs are amenable to change through experiences and reflection on actions. Garriott, Miller and Snyder (2003) surveyed 239 students enrolled in a pre-service education programme regarding their beliefs about where students with mild disabilities should be educated, i.e., in special schools or mainstream education settings. Their results were very illuminating. More than half of those surveyed (55%) believed that students with mild disabilities should be educated in mainstream school settings. They believed that these students would have more enhanced self-esteem and would be better prepared for the real world as adults. They also strongly believed that mainstream classroom educators were often well prepared to teach students with mild disabilities. On the other hand, 45% of the respondents felt that these children must be educated in special or segregated schools so as not to hinder the

78

Chapter Five

progress of other normally developing children, to prevent their being ridiculed, and to receive more specialised help. These teacher trainees did not think that mainstream classroom teachers had the skills and knowledge to teach students with disabilities, mild or otherwise. While the majority attitude augurs well for including all students, the beliefs such as those held by nearly half of the cohort in this study need to be explored and attended to in teacher education programmes. It is likely that their positioning themselves as inadequate will be further reinforced when they begin teaching. Therefore, interrogation of attitudes and beliefs becomes critical to move inclusion from being a “conceptual” framework fraught with disparate understandings to a more “operational” focus (Nutbrown, Clough and Atherton 2010). National policy contexts also impact on trainees’ orientation to inclusive practices. In a study on the impact of ITE on 603 trainee teachers’ attitudes and concerns in four different countries towards including all students, trainees from Australia and Canada—where there was legislation supportive of inclusive practices—showed a greater acceptance of accommodating difference than those from Hong Kong and Singapore, where there are no such legal mandates (Sharma, Forlin and Loreman 2008). This goes to show that inclusive practices and responding to diversity is a complex venture; it is a combination of individual dispositions and systemic support structures. The task and challenge for all educators, observe Nutbrown, Clough and Atherton (2010, 3), is to “enact inclusive policies in practice that challenge our pre-conceptions about human beings: children and their families, society, and success and failure themselves”.

Inclusion and teachers At the end of their comprehensive review of literature spanning a decade and a half on mainstream teachers’ attitudes towards integration and inclusion, Avramidis and Norwich (2002, 143) observed that “there have been no studies which show the move towards more positive attitudes to inclusion leading to widespread acceptance of full inclusion”. This resonates with an earlier meta-analysis of attitudes of American teachers from 1958 to 1995 (Scruggs and Mastropieri 1996, quoted in Avramidis and Norwich 2002), where nearly 40% of teachers in the studies included did not favour a mainstream education option for those with disabilities. This reiterates that teacher attitudes towards students

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

79

with disabilities have remained somewhat unchanged over more than half a century. Studies have also shown that both trainee and experienced teachers are inclined to include those with physical disabilities, social disabilities, and mild learning difficulties but are resistant towards those with more severe behaviour and learning difficulties (Farrell 2000; Levins, Bornholt and Lennon 2005). The question therefore is, is it ethical to allow this trend if education is truly for all children and young persons in this world? The silver lining in the above literature review and an earlier study of schools in a single Local Education Authority in the UK (Avradimis, Bayliss and Burden 2000) is that teachers actually became more positive in their attitudes towards working with children with disabilities over a period of time. Familiarity and pedagogical interactions with these students strengthened their positive attitude as they became more confident in teaching these students. What does emerge from such studies is that teachers’ attitudes stem from a fear of the unknown, and they look inward at their competence level, which determines their negativity to the process of inclusion itself. Therefore, it is imperative that teacher educators have the responsibility of not only preparing teachers to have the confidence to teach all students, but also to support experienced teachers who mentor novices, to bring about a change in their attitudes and beliefs towards inclusive practices.

The critical role of practicum The practicum, which is at the heart of teacher training programmes, has a lasting impact on teacher trainees. If anything, the practicum is a critical period that shapes trainees’ orientations and pedagogy towards student diversity—it is an eye-opener. In New Zealand, teacher trainees have two or three practica during the year, depending on the university1 in which they are enrolled to complete the 14 weeks of placement as mandated by the New Zealand Teachers Council (Kane 2005). Associate teachers (also referred to as co-operative teachers in some countries), are mostly selected by the placement schools from those who volunteer to have a trainee in their classroom amidst other curriculum and administrative demands. There are other practices, which include teachers applying to be associate teachers, with one university soliciting associate teachers. In another, trainees have a certain level of choice of their



1 All Colleges of Education in New Zealand have been merged with their universities.

80

Chapter Five

associate teachers. University-based lecturers visit them once every practicum in a one-year Graduate Diploma programme. Most teacher education providers ask trainees to list their preferences in terms of schools and location but their requests cannot always be met. Despite the impact of practicum on novices, its relatively low level of conceptualisation and status has been a cause for concern for more than a century. Dewey (1904/65, quoted in Schulz 2005) observed that practicum placements should not be for learning skills of teaching for the now and immediate future, but should enable novices to become thinkers and “alert students of education”, a sentiment strongly supported by other scholars in subsequent years. Zeichner (2002, 2012), among others, advocates for the move away from one-to-one mentoring that can perpetuate an apprenticeship model of being inducted into existing systems and practices. Teaching, argues Schulz (2005, 149), “is not a series of routine, habitual, technical acts to be learned, perfected and repeated year after year”. For practicum experiences to move beyond passing the baton, requires associate teachers who are steeped in their own critical professional development. Such mentors will be able to move trainees beyond procedural learning of instructional practices and they can directly model and coach trainees in exemplary multicultural pedagogy (Téllez 2008). As Sleeter and Grant (2009) observe, multicultural pedagogy necessitates inclusivity by bridging the traditional fraction between disability and racebased discourses. Exposure of trainees to such modelling of practices can provide them with a sophisticated understanding that “for each individual student, the intersection of social class, ethnicity and gender can markedly influence cultural practices and prior experiences” (Alton-Lee 2003, 5). Yet, there has been very little emphasis on selecting and/or assigning the very best of teachers to the role (Beck and Kosnik 2002; Schultz 2005; Zeichner 2002). These kinds of limitations led Zeichner (1992) to advocate for both conceptual and structural changes in teacher development programmes. He highlighted the limitation of an apprentice and unstructured model of practicum with a single teacher and decried the practices of locating students in schools of convenience. He argued that if inquiry-based learning approaches were to be adopted, then the nature of reflection expected of trainees must take into consideration the context in which they worked and view “reflection as a social practice where groups of teachers can support and sustain each other’s growth” (299). His concern of placing novices in individual classrooms leading to a “passive imitation of a single teacher” was observed in the study by the author, in which a novice teacher said:

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

81

“Because when you go in (for practicum) but they have their routines that kids know and you know you have to fit in with that.” (Dharan 2010)

On the other hand, in settings where there was community of practice and the trainees had access to classroom teachers as well as teacher educators who could incorporate field related issues directly and immediately into the course work, there was more relevant and meaningful learning for the teacher trainee and, more importantly, a very positive attitude created towards teaching (Wiggins, Folio and Eberly 2007). If trainees are to challenge existing practices, be creative and take risks in teaching and learning situations, there must be a strong link and understanding between ITE providers and their associate teachers (Dharan 2010; Haigh and Ward 2004).

Teacher trainees’ perceptions of practicum There have been a number of studies about teacher trainees’ perceptions of their practicum experiences undertaken in the past two decades (Beck and Kosnik 2002; Lind 2007). In a study of 11 trainees’ perceptions of what constitutes an effective practicum, Beck and Kosnik (2002) showed that the most important aspect was that of associate teachers providing emotional support and treating trainees as equals and working in a collaborative manner. Apart from providing meaningful feedback on their planning and teaching, these participants also wanted their associate teachers to have a “sound approach to teaching and learning” (93). Similar findings were noted in a study of six practicum triads comprising a teacher trainee, associate teacher and a visiting lecturer in New Zealand (Lind 2007). The practicum was identified by the teacher trainees as being a very emotionally charged experience that required considerable attention and nurture. In triads where the associate teachers modelled practices that lacked critical reflection, there was discontent among the trainees. More importantly, the study by Lind (2007) highlighted the dyadic nature of relationships between the visiting lecturer and the trainee teacher and between the associate and the trainee, with very minimal professional conversations taking place amongst them as a triad. This is also a reflection of current practices of the visiting university lecturers in New Zealand, only some of whom teach in the ITE programme (others are ex-staff or retired teachers). During the final practicum, although there are two visits by those who are designated as visiting lecturers, the visits are by two different personnel for bias-free evaluation. Therefore, the notion of a professional learning community with university/school partnership to support both associate teachers and

82

Chapter Five

teacher trainees does not occur as it does elsewhere internationally. Studies in New Zealand (Cameron and Baker 2004; Dharan 2010; Kingsley 2006) have clearly highlighted the disconnect between ITE providers and school staff, and have argued for the need for a more collaborative approach to practica to ensure that deep-seated learning occurs on the ground. In the study by the author the perceived disconnect between ITE and teaching was thus articulated by a novice teacher: “I think at Teachers College you get bombarded with all the theory months before you go into a school. And then you go into a school, and you think, oh god! that doesn’t work.” (Dharan 2010)

Although associate teachers are offered a range of support such as university courses, workshops and information sharing evenings, they are not mandatory. Often it is those mentors with exemplary practices who tend to want more opportunities to develop themselves.

Impact of practicum Dispositions—values, attitudes and preferred ways of doing things— determine the way we learn. They determine the way we act and respond to particular circumstances, and change or modify them based on our ongoing learning (Ellis 2007; Villegas 2007). There have been substantive explanations in the literature on the power of personal biographies and inflexible preconceived notions of teaching and learning of prospective teachers, which mediate their subsequent learnings (Flores 2001; Garmon 2005; Mills and Ballantyne 2010). Nevertheless, the practicum experiences can be an opportunity to disrupt preconceived notions and fears around differences (Campbell and Gilmour 2003). However, their biographies and experiences dispose trainees to gravitate towards schools with a culture and ethos that resonate with their own upbringing, and where they feel emotionally secure. As one of the novices who had worked in one low decile2 and two high decile schools in the author’s study said: “It just made me aware of how different schools work and how each school is very unique and has different beliefs and things like that. There was lot more social work and perhaps helping kids—they don’t have lunch and

 2

Schools in New Zealand are given a decile ranking from 1–10, with one being the lowest based on the socio-economic composition of the community in which they are located.

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

83

there are lots of things like that you don’t have to really do in a decile 10 school. It really is an individual thing about what school you would fit into as a teacher because it is quite a [different] community.” (Dharan 2010)

Learning on the job is highly contextual and is a metacognitive process (Munby et al 2003), but, as part of socialisation into school routines, novices increasingly begin to re-enact and model existing practices; they “resemble those of others in community of practice” (Munby et al 2003, 97). Experienced teachers’ ability to explain tacit knowledge influences the way novices learn to teach. In practice, associate teachers often view practica as the period in which the teacher trainees learn the know-how of teaching akin to an apprenticeship model (Lind 2007).

Changing ways of preparing teachers Teaching is indeed a complex and responsible profession. It is a profession that is constantly under the spotlight, with acts of teaching subjected to scrutiny almost on a daily basis. Whilst on the centre stage of their classrooms, teachers not only need to know the procedural aspects of what to teach, but more importantly, know how to teach and be responsive to all the students in their classrooms. Unfortunately, observes one educational scholar and a champion of inclusive practices, there is a relentless focus on curriculum [what to teach] in teacher preparation programmes and less on pedagogy [how to teach] (Bevan-Brown 2012), which highlights a crucial aspect in teacher preparation that needs further scrutiny. Acknowledging the need to change, there have been a variety of ways in which some ITE programmes are addressing issues of preparing teachers for being responsive and inclusive. They range from a total remodelling of the ITE programme structure, to varying the experiences of trainees through carefully constructed courses and assignments. A study of 19 early childhood education trainees enrolled in a programme that was “designed to prepare teachers to work with culturally, linguistically, socioeconomically, and ability diverse young children and their families” found that internship experiences in diverse communities, critical reflections and dialogues were some of the key elements for preparing teachers to be responsive and inclusive of all students (Kidd, Sánchez and Thorp 2007, 316). Practicum placements by providers of a reformed ITE programme in Canada ensured that the practicum curriculum included aspects of “inquiry and reflection, collaboration, integration, diversity of experiences, caring and career long-learning” (Schulz 2005, 150). It would not be remiss to say that most of these factors, if not all, form the crux of many of the

84

Chapter Five

teacher education programmes internationally (Adler 2009; Averill et al 2009; Carrington and Saggers 2008; Florian, Young and Rouse 2010; Forlin et al 2009; Gay 2010; Ryan and Healy 2009; Sleeter 2003). Teacher education programmes aim to provide variation to the traditional supervision model by extending the practicum time, and forging even closer ties between ITE programme educators and associate teachers (Ewart and Straw 2005; Rodgers and Keil 2007). In the study by Rodgers and Keil (2007), an innovative model of assigning associate teachers the dual role of also being the university supervisors, creating multiple paired dyads, resulted in not only an effective practicum experience for trainees, but also provided critical professional learning opportunities for the associate teachers. Such practices seem uncommon, and certainly are not currently in existence in New Zealand. Extending novices’ understandings to teach all students is a developmentally progressive task that moves them along the continuum of being self-aware to having a commitment to social justice (Mills and Ballantyne 2010). Therefore, trainees need to be systematically guided during their practice to critically examine their beliefs and understanding of issues such us race, ethnicity, and culture that will lead to their learning to address equity in their classrooms. Oversight of differences among students, and providing a normal curriculum, can result in under-preparing teachers for the realities of classroom diversity, as articulated by a novice teacher in the author’s study: “I think what would have been useful at Teachers College for primary teacher training, is that they include more detailed information about developmental pedagogy. I think a little bit more time could have been spent on knowing, and [having] good resources for example on Down Syndrome, Autism, ADHD. We don’t really hear anything about any of those things and they all come under the banner of diversity. And even if you did hear about them, it is just some tiny little thing. So I think it is a little bit of hole, in terms of pre teacher training.” (Dharan 2010).

Beginning to teach Mentoring support for beginning teachers in the NZ context has been acclaimed internationally (Clement 2000; Darling-Hammond 2005; Wong, Britton and Ganser 2005). The time allocation for new teachers to be away from the classroom and the assigning of mentors has been particularly singled out as a practice that needs to be emulated. Indeed, this aspect of supporting beginning teachers needs to be applauded. But what is more important is to ascertain whether the nature of professional support

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

85

provided during the practicum and beyond is based on critical inquiry that provides transformative learning experiences. For teacher trainees in particular, the practicum serves as a two-way street. While it enables schools to select their future appointments, it also assists trainees to identify their preferred place of work (Dharan 2010). These ideas were expressed in the author’s study. The first quote was articulated by one of the novice teachers, while the second quote summarises the general tone of the principals in the study that captures the above bi-directional gaze: “My third [practicum placement] was really negative. I was losing confidence—being undermined. And then coming here, it was just brilliant.” “With our Year 1, she was on a four or five week sole charge in the class. So we saw her in action anyway. So we knew she was a goodie.” (Dharan 2010)

Such practices have the potential to consolidate existing beliefs, attitudes and ways of working and prevent trainees from taking a critical approach in their practica. Studies have also shown that it is not only in placements, but even during the induction period, where the focus is on practical support and advice, rather than an enquiry-based examination of teaching and learning decisions (Sinnema 2005; Timperley 2003). Despite the New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education 2007) having inclusion as one of its fundamental values, pressures of nationally standardised assessments that lead to inevitable comparisons of schools’ performances, can be counter-productive to those who are inclined to be inclusive. Also during this early period of initiation to teaching, established practices and the ritual of ‘learning the ropes’ are appealing to novices, as it reduces uncertainty and provides confidence (Dharan 2010; Munby et al 2003). This in turn results in preserving the status quo rather than having opportunities to critique and challenge existing practices (Averill et al 2009; Dharan 2013; Parks 2010; Spalding et al 2010). The following comment by a novice teacher in the author’s study sums up this notion of fitting in: “I have just kind of been subsumed into the school. I guess I feel very much at home here … and in making those same kinds of comments that [tutor teacher] would make.” (Dharan 2010)

86

Chapter Five

Ways forward As research in the UK has shown (Ainscow, Booth and Dyson 2006; Ainscow et al 2012), a focus on achievement of students can serve as a catalyst to examine underachieving and marginalised students. The key though is to provide some interruptions and create a disequilibrium. Mentors steeped in ways of being and teaching for a number of years necessarily have the expertise to pass on procedural knowledge and routine. Thus, what is required is the infusion of a critical dimension to existing practices. This can be provided through a partnership between teacher education providers and schools to facilitate on-going professional support for novices and experienced teachers that focuses on the broader issues of equity and social justice (Achinstein and Athanases 2005; Darling-Hammond 2006; Zeichner 2010). To debunk tacit and often unintentional influence of privileged and normative ways of working, it is necessary that “knowledge in practice” occurs as “an interface between student teachers, co-operating teachers, university staff and other school personnel” (Hollins 2011, 125). Doing so involves having a shared understanding of what being responsive and inclusive of all students is about, as there is no ubiquitous understanding of this complex, yet humane practice. Given this, the theoretical understandings of inclusive practices as articulated by Black-Hawkins and Florian (2012) are worth considering to guide both experienced and novice teachers. They state that an inclusive pedagogical approach requires a shift from a focus on “students with additional needs to learning of all children in the community of the classroom; rejecting deterministic belief about ability and seeing difficulties in learning as professional challenges for teachers, rather than deficits in learners” (575). Having this shared understanding between and among all educators is likely to produce learning focused discourses that explore newer ways of teaching and learning for all students. The model of professional development schools (PDS) in the United States seems promising to address both structural and conceptual barriers to teacher preparation (Darling Hammond 2006; Zeichner 1992, 2002). Apart from providing a close link between schools, ITE providers and the trainee teachers, the community of learning established during the process of ongoing professional learning provides continuous opportunities to strengthen theory-to-practice links. Although not all PDS schools are equally effective in achieving the goals of exemplary practices to support trainees and new teachers, these schools are committed to being responsive and inclusive of all and take a whole school approach to

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

87

transforming practices that address issues of inequity (Darling-Hammond 2006). While such a formalised structure of PDS does not exist in New Zealand, such professional partnerships can be critical in the neo-liberal era of education when national testing regimen can create inflexible pedagogical routines. Such compelling pressures are bound to influence teacher trainees’ introduction and novices’ induction into ways of teaching. Therefore, the notion of a well-connected community of teacher educators, teacher trainees and schools can counter-balance the one size fits all approach, and facilitate the process of grounding pedagogical practices around equity, social justice and inclusion. There is also merit in the arguments put forth that scholarship in education should focus on school effectiveness, which can identify and support inclusive practices. What this line of argument signals is that no one group of educators, or any single dimension of teacher professional development—pre-service or in-service—can bring about changes to classroom practices. Instead, viewing issues of equity and socially just practices in the context of school effectiveness is likely to bring about more systemic and structural changes towards inclusive education. Learning to teach is indeed a complex intertwining of personal biographies and idiosyncratic contextual variables, but it is critical that the profession is seen as a collective community of critical inquirers. To this effect, teacher education programmes are and have to move away from a stage model to a more collaborative approach in which trainees and beginning teachers have equal voices and dialogues that are centred on issues of equity and diversity. Such a community of support can assist in dispelling the notions of latency and survival in learning to teach all students. As Hollins (2011, 126) observes, constructing knowledge in practice is required to gain an “operational understanding” of the relationship between “pedagogy, learner, learning and learner outcomes”. It can be said that the time is ripe, or perhaps overdue, for such seamless professional teaching and learning communities to become the norm. Or will the notion be placed in the too hard basket?

Acknowledgement The author acknowledges the financial support of Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand for the conference preparation and attendance. Sincere thanks to Susan Kaiser, Research Administrator, Victoria University of Wellington for editorial comments on the draft article.

88

Chapter Five

References Achinstein, B., and S. Athanases. 2005. Focusing new teachers on diversity and equity: Toward a knowledge base for mentors. Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (7): 843–862. Adler, S. 2011. Teacher epistemology and collective narratives: Interrogating teaching and diversity. Teaching and Teacher Education 27 (3): 609–618. Ainscow, M., and T. Booth. 2000. The index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools. Bristol, UK: Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education. Ainscow, M., T. Booth and A. Dyson. 2006. Improving schools, developing inclusion. London: Routledge. Ainscow, M., A. Dyson, S. Goldrick and M.West. 2012. Making schools effective for all: Rethinking the task. School Leadership & Management 32 (3): 197–213. Alton-Lee, A. 2003. Quality teaching for diverse students in schooling: Best evidence synthesis. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education. Averill, R., D. Anderson, H. Easton, P. Te Maro, D. Smith and A. Hynds. 2009. Culturally responsive teaching models: Three models from linked studies. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 40 (2): 157–186. Avramidis, E., P. Bayliss and R. Buden. 2000. A survey into mainstream teachers' attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school in one Local Education Authority. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology 20 (2): 191–211. Avramidis, E.and B. Norwich. 2002. Teachers' attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education 17 (2): 129–147. Ballard, K. 1996. Inclusive education in New Zealand: Culture, context and ideology. Cambridge Journal of Education 26 (1): 33–45. Banks, C. and J. Banks. 1995. Equity pedagogy: An essential component of multicultural education. Theory into Practice 34 (3): 152–158. Beck, C. and C. Kosnik. 2002. Professors and the practicum. Journal of Teacher Education 53 (1): 6–19. Bevan-Brown, J. 2012. Championing inclusion: An interview with Professor Luanna Meyer. Kairaranga 13 (2): 3–10. Black-Hawkins, K. and L. Florian. 2012. Classroom teachers' craft knowledge of their inclusive practice. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 18 (5): 567–584.

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

89

Bratlinger, E. 1996. Influence of pre service teachers' beliefs about pupil achievement on attitudes toward inclusion. Teacher Education and Special Education 19 (1): 17–33. Cameron, M. and R. Baker. 2004. Research on initial teacher education in New Zealand: 1993–2004. Literature review and annotated bibliography. Wellington: NZCER. Campbell, J., L. Gilmore and M. Cuskelly. 2003. Changing student teachers' attitudes towards disability and inclusion. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability 28 (4): 369–379. Carrington, S. and B. Saggers. 2008. Service–learning informing the development of an inclusive ethical framework for beginning teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (3): 795–806. Clement, M. 2000. Making time for teacher induction: A lesson from the New Zealand model. The Clearing House 7 (3): 329–331. Darling-Hammond, L. 2000. How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education 51 (3): 166–173. —. 2005. Teaching as a profession: Lessons in teacher preparation and professional development. Phi Delta Kappan 8 (3): 237–240. —. 2006. Constructing 21st–Century Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education 57: 300–314. Dharan, V. 2010. Beginning teachers, schools, and diversity. Unpublished Doctoral thesis. New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington. —. 2013. Understanding diversity: Moving beginning teachers beyond receiving the baton. In J. Bevan–Brown ed. Inclusive education: Perspectives on professional practice 40–51. Palmerston North, NZ: Dunmore Press. Ellis, V. 2007. Subject knowledge and teacher education: The development of beginning teachers’ thinking. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Ewart, G. and S. Straw. 2005. A seven-month practicum: Collaborating teachers' response. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'éducation 28 (1/2): 185–202. Farrell, P. 2000. The impact of research on developments in inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education 4 (2): 153– 162. Flores, M. 2001. Person and context in becoming a new teacher. Journal of Education for Teaching 27 (2): 135–148. Florian, L. 2009. Preparing teachers to work in “schools for all”. Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (4): 533–534. —. 2011. Introduction: Mapping international developments in teacher education for inclusion. Prospects 41 (3): 319–321.

90

Chapter Five

Florian, L., K. Young, and M. Rouse. 2010. Preparing teachers for inclusive and diverse educational environments: Studying curricular reform in an initial teacher education course. International Journal of Inclusive Education 14 (7): 709–222. Forlin, C., T. Loreman, U. Sharma and C. Earle. 2009. Demographic differences in changing pre-service teachers’ attitudes, sentiments and concerns about inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education 13 (2): 195–209. Garmon, M. 2005. Six key factors for changing pre-service teachers’ attitudes/beliefs about diversity. Educational Studies 38 (3): 275–286. Garriott, P., M. Miller and L. Snyder. 2003. Pre-service teachers' beliefs about inclusive education: What should teacher educators know? Action in Teacher Education 25 (1): 48–54. Gay, G. 2010. Acting on beliefs in teacher education for cultural diversity. Journal of Teacher Education 61 (1/2): 143–152. Haigh, M. and G. Ward. 2004. Problematising practicum relationships: Questioning the “taken for granted”. Australian Journal of Education 48 (2): 134–148. Hollins, E. 2011. The meaning of culture in learning to teach: The power of socialisation and identity formation. In Studying diversity in teacher education, ed. A. F. Ball and C. A. Tyson,105–130. New York: Roman & Little. Kagan, D. 1992. Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist 27 (1): 65–90. Kane, R. 2005. Initial teacher education: Policy and practice. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education. Kidd, J., S. Sánchez and E. Thorp. 2008. Defining moments: Developing culturally responsive dispositions and teaching practices in early childhood pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2): 316–329. Kingsley, A. 2006. Theory to practice: Is there a real connection for teachers in teacher education? Unpublished Master’s thesis, Wellington, NZ: Victoria University of Wellington. Kugelmass, J. and M. Ainscow. 2004. Leadership for inclusion: A comparison of international practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs 4 (3): 133–141. Levins, T., L. Bornholt, and B. Lennon. 2005. Teachers’ experience, attitudes, feelings and behavioural intentions towards children with special educational needs. Social Psychology of Education 8 (3): 329– 343.

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

91

Lind, P. 2005. The perceptions of teacher education in relation to the teaching practicum. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work 2 (1): 30 Meyer, L., H. Park, M. Grenot-Scheyer and B. Harry. 1998. Making friends: The influences of culture and development. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company. Meyer, L., J. Bevan-Brown, H. Park and C. Savage. 2010. School inclusion and multicultural issues in special education. In Multicultural education, issues and perspectives, 7th edn., eds J. Banks and C Banks, 343–368. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Miles, S. and N. Singal. 2010. The education for all and inclusive education debate: Conflict, contradiction or opportunity? International Journal of Inclusive Education 14 (1): 1–15. Mills, C. and J. Ballantyne. 2010. Pre-service teachers’ dispositions towards diversity: Arguing for a developmental hierarchy of change. Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (3): 447–454. Ministry of Education (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media. Morton, M. and E. Gordon. 2006. Inclusive education in Aotearoa: What are we doing in initial teacher education, professional learning and development? Wellington: NZCCS. Munby, H., J. Versnel, N. Hutchinson, P. Chin and D. Berg. 2003. Workplace learning and the metacognitive functions of routines. Journal of Workplace Learning 15 (3): 94–104. Nutbrown, C., P. Clough and F. Atherson. 2010. Inclusion in the early years, 2nd edn., London: Sage Publications. O' Neill, J., R. Bourke and A. Kearney. 2009. Discourses of inclusion in initial teacher education: Unravelling a New Zealand “number eight wire” knot. Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (4): 588–593. Pajares, M. 1992. Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research 62 (3): 307–322. Parks, A. 2010. Metaphors of hierarchy in mathematics education discourse: The narrow path. Journal of Curriculum Studies 42 (1): 79– 97. Proctor, R. and J. Niemeyer. 2001. Pre-service teacher beliefs about inclusion: Implications for early intervention educators. Journal of Early Intervention 24 (1): 55–66. Richardson, V. 1996. The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In The handbook of research on teacher education, 2nd edn., ed. J. Shukla, 102–119. New York: Macmillan. Rodgers, A. and V. Keil. 2007. Restructuring a traditional student teacher supervision model: Fostering enhanced professional development and

92

Chapter Five

mentoring within a professional development school context. Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (1): 63–80. Ryan, M. and A. Healy. 2009. It’s not all about school: Ways of disrupting pre-service teachers’ perceptions of pedagogy and communication. Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (3): 424–429. Schulz, R. 2005. The practicum: More than practice. Canadian Journal of Education 28 (1/2): 147–167. Sebba, J. and M. Ainscow. 1996. International developments in inclusive schooling: Mapping the issues. Cambridge Journal of Education 26 (1): 5–18. Sharma, U., C. Forlin, and T. Loreman. 2008. Impact of training on preservice teachers' attitudes and concerns about inclusive education and sentiments about persons with disabilities. Disability & Society 23 (7): 773–785. Sinnema, C. 2005. Teacher appraisal: Missed opportunities for learning. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, The University of Auckland. Skiba, R., A. Simmons, S. Ritter, A. Gibb, M. Rausch, J. Cuadrado and C. Chung. 2008. Achieving equity in special education: History, status, and current challenges. Exceptional Children 74 (3): 264–288. Sleeter, C. 2003. Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to race, class, and gender. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Sleeter, C. and C. Grant. 2009. Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to race, class and gender. 6th edn., New York: John Wiley and Sons. Spalding, E., Klecka, C., E. Lin, S. Odell, E. Spalding and J. Wang. 2010. Social justice and teacher education: A hammer, a bell, and a song. Journal of Teacher Education 61 (3): 191–196. Téllez, K. 2008. What student teachers learn about multicultural education from their co-operating teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (1): 43–58. Thomas, G. and A. Loxley. 2007. De-constructing special education and constructing inclusion, 2nd edn., London: McGraw Hill. Timperley, H. 2003. School improvement and teachers’ expectations of student achievement. New Zealand Journal of Education Studies 38 (1): 73–88. Villegas, A. 2007. Dispositions in teacher education: A look at social justice. Journal of Teacher Education 58 (5): 370–380. Walshaw, M. 2007. Working with Foucault in education. Rotterdam: Sense.

Engraining Inclusive Pedagogy

93

Wiggins, R., E. Follo and M. Eberly. 2007. The impact of a field immersion program on pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward teaching in culturally diverse classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (5): 653–663. Wong, H., E. Britton and T. Ganser. 2005. What the world can teach us about new teacher induction. Phi Delta Kappan 86 (5): 379–384. Zeichner, K. 1992. Rethinking the practicum in the professional development school partnership. Journal of Teacher Education 43 (4): 296–307. —. 1993. Connecting genuine teacher development to the struggle for social justice. Journal of Education for Teaching 19 (1): 5–20. —. 2002. Beyond traditional structures of student teaching. Teacher Education Quarterly 29 (2): 59–59. —. 2010. Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college– and university–based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education 61 (1/2): 89–99. —. 2012. The turn once again toward practice–based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education 63(5): 376–382.

CHAPTER SIX AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF THE POSITIVE BEHAVIOUR SUPPORT MODEL FOR LIMPOPO’S PRIMARY SCHOOLS (GRADE R–3): PRELIMINARY FINDINGS VERONICA MOODLEY

Introduction In the South African educational context, as in other parts of the world, behavioural difficulties have been found to be one of the most challenging problems facing teachers. Evaluating the contexts in which behavioural difficulties occur and are sustained is essential to understanding behaviour as well as the possible support structures for teachers facing such an obstacle. This chapter focuses on the preliminary findings of research currently underway to determine the extent to which one model of behaviour support, the Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) model, could serve as a useful tool in the identification and support of learners with behavioural difficulties. The study explores behaviour and behaviour support from an ecosystemic perspective, and it is within this perspective that the PBS model is being evaluated for its feasibility as a behaviour support model for South African teachers in Limpopo Province. In the South African context, learner behavioural difficulties continue to be a major problem in schools. The general climate of undisciplined behaviour and reluctance to accept authority often results in the disempowerment of teachers, as well as the disturbance and interruption of teaching and learning in the classroom. Learner behaviour can be regarded as a purposeful form of communication, and the child’s capacity to choose appropriate behaviour is influenced by his/her developmental ability, temperament, interactions and life experiences, along with environmental factors (Papatheodorou, 2005). As learners enter the formal schooling

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

95

environment in grade R–3, behavioural difficulties and problems in educational settings at that stage are often seen as “behaviour that is out of place; the behaviour is not disruptive by itself, but becomes disruptive at certain times and in certain places” (Lawrence and Steed 1984, 17). Common forms of disruptive behaviour exist to some extent in all classrooms. They are called “surface behaviours, because they are usually not the result of deep-seated personal problems, but normal developmental behaviour of children” (Marais and Meier 2010, 43).

Behaviour and behaviour support in the South African context The Department of Education (DoE) (2001, 2002) uses the term “challenging behaviour” to describe various behavioural difficulties. Prinsloo and Gasa (2011) have recorded teachers who report serious behavioural difficulties forming part of the South African school scene to include behaviours that are physically and psychologically unsafe, such as lying, stealing, truancy, fighting, the use of addictive substances and rape. Regarding the difficulties that interfere more frequently with the classroom routine and teaching and learning, the most common problems include: “attention seeking and disruptive behaviour, attention deficit, aggressiveness, stubborn disobedience and a refusal to accept discipline, negativity (a refusal to strive towards achievement or to work and co-operate with others), depression, anxiety, lack of motivation and interest, talking out of turn and hampering other learners” (Prinsloo and Gasa 2011, 492). Behaviours that cause the destruction of property include vandalism and arson. In seeking to define behavioural difficulties, Wood and Lakin’s (1982) suggestion in Papatheodorou (2005) is considered valuable. They emphasise that any definition of behaviour should include the following elements inter alia: i) who or what is perceived to be the focus of the problem; ii) how the behaviour is described and operationalised and by whom; iii) the setting in which the behaviour occurs; and iv) whether or not the definition used informs planning for intervention and programme evaluation. Such elements take into consideration the crucial importance of all those involved in the support of learners within the school in order to clarify their definitions and to provide an operational definition that can form the basis of support in light of the behavioural challenge posed. This shifts the emphasis from an inside-out dichotomy regarding aetiology and the causes of behaviour problems, to interactionist and ecosystemic

96

Chapter Six

approaches, which emphasise the impact of dynamic interactions within and between different systems, as well as the way they affect behaviour. With the promulgation of Education White Paper Six (DoE 2001) nationally, there is an increasing emphasis on the need of inclusive systems to foster social inclusion, thereby embracing differences and nurturing attitudes of acceptance and respect (Swart and Pettipher 2011). Within the inclusive framework, learners who present with behavioural difficulties must also be accommodated, as an inclusive system should actively aim to accommodate all children, regardless of their social and emotional difficulties (UNESCO 1994). Prinsloo and Gasa emphasise that whilst education systems do need to recognise and respond effectively to learners who present with behavioural difficulties, teachers are unfortunately not adequately trained to address behaviour difficulties. Prinsloo and Gasa strongly advocate that teacher training is needed to ensure teachers to have “the skills to observe and assess undesirable behaviour and the ability to design suitable strategies to prevent and alter misbehaviour” (2011, 495). When pre-service teachers qualify and enter the profession as inservice teachers, they increasingly need to rely on standard strategies for addressing classroom behaviour difficulties, such as: clear rules and expectations; being physically close to their students; and praising and encouraging positive behaviour (Gable, Quinn, Rutherford, Howell and Hoffman 2000). Many in-service teachers therefore, either independently or with the support of their colleagues, are able to find a few successful solutions to certain learner behavioural difficulties. However, for some inservice teachers, these strategies fail to produce the desired outcome and may actually exacerbate an already difficult situation. Whilst internationally, the Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) model has been found to “effectively support teachers’ efforts to address young children’s challenging behaviour and to build their social and emotional competence” (Benedict, Horner and Squires 2007, 191), within the South African context there is minimal research regarding PBS or its potential value in the South African primary school. Given the dearth of comprehensive support tools available to manage and prevent behavioural difficulties, the role of PBS is being investigated for its feasibility within the South African school context in the Foundation Phase (FP) in Limpopo Province. The current study aims to assist pre-service teachers in their understanding and support of behavioural difficulties as they present within the grade R–3 classroom. In so doing, the study seeks to bridge the gap in pre-service training in the area of behavioural support and, as a result, better equip in-service teachers to manage behavioural difficulties in their classroom practices in Limpopo Province. The study does not

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

97

make any claims for PBS as an advanced or superior model of behaviour support, but rather acknowledges that there is too little information available to maintain that positive approaches are “capable of solving all behaviour problems or documenting that one approach is superior to any other” (Johnston et al 2006, 56). The study seeks rather to consider the extent to which PBS may offer teachers in Limpopo Province a useful tool for the identification and support of learners with behavioural difficulties.

Background to the study The study forms part of a National European Union-funded Primary Education Sector Policy Support Programme (EU SPSP) entitled Strengthening FP teacher education launched in 2010, of which the University of the Witwatersrand School of Education (WSoE) is a partner. Part of the WSoE’s involvement in this project is to partner with the University of Limpopo (UL) and assist the UL in the development of a FP teacher education programme. It is envisaged that the first year of this programme will commence in either 2015 or 2016 and the UL will be the only institution offering a teacher training degree for that province. It is understandable, therefore, that the WSoE and the UL partnership has farreaching implications for teacher training support initiatives in the province of Limpopo. In addition to the UL and Wits partnership, in 2009 the Limpopo Education Department (LED) funded 210 FP teachers to complete a second four-year teaching qualification at WSoE. This bold step by the LED signalled the department’s resolve to improve the quality of teaching and learning in the FP at its primary schools. From this cohort of funded teachers, some completed the WSoE Bachelor of Education undergraduate programme in 2012, with others completing in 2013 where subjects were still outstanding. The Limpopo cohort of teachers at WSoE formed the sample for this study. This cohort of teachers was considered to be best positioned to offer insights in the building of knowledge that focuses on educational development and support in Limpopo. The teachers had several years of teaching experience in the FP classroom in Limpopo Province, and for the purposes of this study, were deemed to be wellpositioned to be partners in the development of an undergraduate module in the area of behaviour support for the province. In light of the above, research is currently underway to discover the following:

98

Chapter Six

x What are the perceptions of Limpopo in-service FP teachers regarding the inclusion of learners with behavioural difficulties? x What types of behavioural difficulties do these FP teachers perceive as problematic and what are their perceptions of their abilities to manage these in the classroom? x Do these FP teachers find the Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) programme to be useful in the identification and the support of learners with behavioural difficulties?

Theoretical underpinnings of the study Before elaborating on the empirical section of the research, a brief outline is given of the theoretical foundation on which the research is based, to which end the literature on behaviour and behavioural support is revisited. The research is premised on Bronfenbrenner’s ecosystemic theory (Bronfenbrenner (1977, 1979, 1986, 1992), Bronfenbrenner and Ceci (1994) and Bronfenbrenner and Morris (1998)). The ecosystemic approach to understanding emotional and behavioural difficulties in schools conceptualises behaviour problems at school through the analysis of the interactional patterns observable within social systems. It is based on the view that human behaviour is developed and maintained through interactional processes. The model is useful in understanding classrooms, schools and families, by viewing them as systems in themselves and in interaction with and within the broader social context. Within this model there is significant emphasis on the interactions that occur in face-to-face long-term relationships, as such relationships are seen as important in shaping lasting aspects of development. These proximal interactions (such as the interaction between parent and child, teacher and learner, or a child and his/her best friend) are affected by person factors as well as by the social contexts within which they occur. These person, processes and contexts change over time due to children’s maturation, as well as due to changes in the given social context (Donald, Lazarus and Lolwana 2009). Cooper and Upton (1990) highlight some of the key features of the ecosystemic approach that build an understanding of school behaviour difficulties. These key features include the notion that the problem behaviour in the classroom is not seen as originating from within the individual who displays the behaviour (a medical model view), but is rather a product of social interaction (a social model view). These interactional patterns may be interpreted in simple or complex ways. The

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

99

simple analysis is limited to present situations, and will define a learner's negative behaviour in terms of the interactions immediately linked to this behaviour. A complex analysis takes into account factors in the wider ecosystem and explores purposes that the present behaviour might serve in other, related ecosystems. Such an analysis may relate oppositional behaviour in the classroom to interactional patterns in the learner's family. It may also relate to the interactional patterns of classroom teaching practices and of curriculum content matter. Lessons that do not stimulate a learner’s cognitive ability, which renders the learner thoroughly bored or thoroughly confused during classes, can result in the learner presenting with challenging behaviour in the classroom. A further relational analysis could include the explanation proffered by Visser and Stokes (2003) that takes some of the important variables affecting the definition of behavioural difficulties to be teachers’ attitudes, perceptions, feelings and degree of tolerance. The teachers’ definition and interpretation of a learner’s behaviour within their setting are of significance to the study of behavioural difficulties. Teachers’ perceptions of a young learner’s behaviour suggest that any “behaviour that has an effect on the learner’s own and other learners’ well-being and on the teaching and learning processes should receive due attention to eliminate future difficulties” (Papatheodorou 2005, 13). Whitt and Danforth (2010) emphasise that the metaphors and narratives teachers use to describe learner behaviour, create a naming of the situation, and as such, shape and frame the lenses through which the behaviour is problematised and understood. This power of address can be understood as the “power that identifies a person, labels their intent and categorises their behaviour” (Whitt and Danforth 2010, 149). In addition, these authors emphasise that by steering away from the “within the child” or medical narrative when framing difficult and challenging behaviour, the teachers’ power of address could then be removed from observer and reporter status, and teachers can “reclaim their agency, point of view and professional role through understanding how the power of address is an integral part of what teachers do every day” (2010, 147). In view of Bronfenbrenner’s ecosystemic framework, it is apparent that an extensive array of systemic factors can impact and influence what is considered to be challenging behaviour in the classroom. It is possible that in embracing an ecosystemic framework, factors within the system of the school and classroom (viz. classroom pedagogical issues, teacher-learner relationships and power relations, family, socio-economic and sociocultural issues, etc.) as well as the way in which they interrelate and affect

100

Chapter Six

learners, can be used to assist in the identification and support of behavioural difficulties within the school system. In essence, to manage behavioural difficulties, a teacher must first understand them in context. Marais and Meier (2010, 48) emphasise that this understanding requires comprehensive background knowledge of the child within his/her context, “the reasons why learners behave and misbehave, and which types of difficult behaviour occur most frequently in the classroom and on playgrounds”. In recent years, shifts both nationally and internationally regarding special needs education have influenced the movement towards inclusive education in South Africa. Inclusive education can be defined as “a system of education that is responsive to the diverse needs of learners” (Engelbrecht, et al 1999, 19). International government policies have been issued on the inclusion of children with special education needs in mainstream classrooms and the reduction in the numbers of learners excluded from school for disciplinary reasons (Evans, Harden and Thomas 2004). Both of these groups will include learners with behavioural difficulties, and there is national and international pressure on both schools and education departments to find new ways of enabling teachers to support children with behavioural difficulties to allow them to be included in mainstream classrooms with their peers. In response to the need for behavioural support in primary and high schools, the Department of Education in Gauteng has undertaken a few models of behaviour support, of which the Alternatives to Corporal Punishment (DoE 2000) campaign played a significant role. With the emerging focus on Early Childhood Development and the roll out of Education White Papers Five and Six (DoE 2001, 2002), there is also a determined focus within the national education department to enhance support in South Africa’s primary schools. There is an increasing demand for early intervention efforts that focus on young children who are at risk for developing patterns of behavioural difficulties in school (Benedict, Horner and Squires 2007). Supporting children who are considered to have emotional and behavioural difficulties within mainstream settings raises significant issues for the need to engage with behaviour management and support policies from an inclusive perspective (Evans, Harden and Thomas 2004). Pienaar and Raymond advocate that for teachers to be effective and proactive in the classroom, they need to identify strengths and assets in the learner’s immediate contexts, which includes the learner’s relationships at home and in the community environment. They affirm that the interactions of learners in their various environments (viz. family, classrooms and

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

101

neighbourhood microsystems) “provide important clues about the learner’s social developments as well as about their potential strengths in social behaviour that may support classroom learning” (Pienaar and Raymond 2013, 177).

The Positive Behaviour Support Model The PBS model of behaviour support is argued here as a useful tool in supporting learners and teachers, by maximising learner success and minimising problematic behaviours in the classroom as well as throughout the school. PBS focuses on supports that can be delivered in natural contexts by families, teachers, and typical support personnel. The emphasis is on behaviour change that spans the full spectrum of activities, locations, time of day, and social context that an individual typically encounters. The PBS model “combines behavioural, cognitive, biophysical, social, developmental, and environmental psychology, and it is purposefully focused on the model of environments that encourage desired behaviours and reduces the expansion and support of difficult behaviours” (Dunlap, Sailor, Horner and Sugai 2009, 4). The PBS framework of support comprises three tiers of support, with increasing levels of intensity of assistance and intervention. Tier 1 incorporates universal school support, by encouraging the core values of respect, responsibility and safety. It includes the implementation of strategies for teaching and reinforcing these core values within the school as a whole within all classrooms (school-wide/classroom-wide support). Teaching all learners how to be effective members of a group is vital in ensuring children “learn how to live in inclusive societies and become citizens who will contribute to society’s well being” (Pienaar and Raymond 2013, 179). Tier 1 support is intended to benefit the majority of learners in a school (80–85%). Tier 2 support focuses on 10–15% of learners in the school, who will further need targeted, social skills instruction, simple behaviour plans and increased group and peer mentoring. Tier 3 support aids the 1–5% of learners, who may, in addition to Tier 1 and 2 support levels, need increased targeted support. This may include behavioural assessments and behaviour plans developed in collaboration with the parent, learner, and where necessary, health professionals (CECP 1998). The PBS model places an emphasis on systems change and on the sociology of behaviour, focusing on organisational and cultural systems within which support is provided. The emphasis on person-centred planning and team-based decision making which “extends behaviour

102

Chapter Six

support beyond management of events in the immediate life space of the individual to recognition that schedules, staffing patterns, cultural expectations, physical conditions, budgeting, and organisational policy are also likely to affect the success of behaviour support” (Dunlap and Carr 2009, 5). Here consideration is given to the fact that decisions made by administrators are as important to successful behaviour support as are decisions made by those in immediate contact with an individual. This comprehensive emphasis on the systems needed to nurture and sustain effective interventions distinguishes PBS from many other intervention approaches. Any model of behaviour support is, as a matter of good practice, subject to critique and evaluation. Despite the many merits of the PBS model as outlined above, there are certain criticisms of the model raised by authors Johnston et al (2006). These authors are concerned that the training of teachers in the use of the PBS model may require training in many aspects including the aspects of “systems theory, psychology, human development, and education, as well as the values embedded in the social constructs of full inclusion, person- and family centred planning, and self-determination” (2006, 56). The challenge is that because PBS training is usually offered in non-academic settings to individuals with varied backgrounds, the curricula are restricted in breadth and depth. Whilst this study argues for PBS to be included as a pre-service training module, the critique of Johnston et al (2006) remains a valid one. Even at pre-service training levels, an integration of the curriculum will be necessary to incorporate the wide range of curricula areas required to be covered in equipping teachers with the use of the PBS model. Pre-service training includes a mandatory focus on aspects of systems theory, psychology, human development and education; and this study therefore considers that such an integration of the curriculum is possible. The integration may need strong advocacy for buy-in, which although difficult to achieve, is not impossible. A further issue of concern raised within the PBS training discussion is the challenge of cultural competencies of the teachers when incorporating multicultural competencies into the PBS model. Utley, Kozleski, Smith and Draper (2002), explain that this involves teachers having the capacity to respond to the unique needs of populations whose cultures are different from their own. It will become necessary then in pre-service training that issues of cultural sensitivity are also highlighted. In light of this study, it is considered that the Limpopo cohort of respondents is a valuable indicator of cultural effectiveness because the application of the model is being

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

103

investigated within a population group sharing similar cultural values and beliefs. Further critique by Johnston et al (2006) concerns the efficacy of the PBS model. These authors confirm that within the published studies on PBS, some evaluations have “reasonable designs and longitudinal methods of evaluations” (2006, 69). Their criticism, however, is that the evaluations of PBS interventions are often more descriptive than experimental, rendering the evaluations less objective, which make it challenging to determine the critical features and effects of interventions within the PBS model. These authors add that while the PBS movement is not without its merits, the model has been driven more by “ideological and marketing interests than by research findings and professional considerations” (Johnston et al 2006, 69). In contrast, this study seeks to determine the extent to which PBS could serve as a useful model for Limpopo teachers, without making any claims for PBS as an advanced or superior model of behaviour support.

Research design The study involves a mixed method of research design, with components of both quantitative and qualitative data collection, for the purpose of adding breadth and depth of understanding within the research. The qualitative data and their analysis “refine and explain the statistical results by exploring the participants’ views in more depth” (Punch 2009, 200). The data collection began at first with a survey questionnaire of Limpopo Province FP teacher perceptions of behavioural difficulties as experienced in their classroom practice, as well as their perceptions of how equipped they felt to manage these behavioural difficulties. Surveys are considered valuable tools to administer to entire populations or to a sample population in order to describe the attitudes, behaviours and opinions of the population in relation to a research area (Creswell 2008). The survey was used at the beginning of the study to describe trends in the data collected, rather than to offer rigorous explanations (Creswell 2008). Following the survey, an education module was developed in order to introduce the Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) model and its applications to the school environment. The module was taught in the second semester of 2012, to FP pre-service teachers including the sample cohort, in their fourth year of study. The study then went on to investigate whether teachers found the PBS module a useful tool for the identification and support of learners with behavioural difficulties within Limpopo schools

104

Chapter Six

in grades R–3. This was determined using course evaluations following the teaching of a behaviour support module in October 2012. Focus group interviews that followed the teaching of the module were used to further flesh out some of the issues that emerged from the questionnaires and course evaluations. Quantitative data were analysed using the statistical analysis package SPSS. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data. Survey questionnaires were distributed during lunchtime meetings of Limpopo teachers over a period of three days. The forms were completed and placed in a box within the venue where the meeting was held. A total of 82 of the 210 Limpopo teachers volunteered participation in the survey questionnaires, with 91 of the 210 participating in the course evaluation. 144 of the 210 teachers participated in focus group interviews.

Discussion of preliminary findings The preliminary findings will be reported on in the following sequence: i) Limpopo teachers’ identifications of behaviours they found most problematic in Limpopo schools; ii) practices engaged in to manage such behaviour within the Limpopo schools; iii) perceptions of the causes of behavioural difficulties in the schools; and iv) evaluation by the Limpopo teachers of the PBS model. Findings on identified behavioural difficulties in the questionnaires were grouped into three categories: inattention/distractibility/hyperactive (descriptors included: easily distracted, concentration wanders, restless, cannot sit still); bullying or violent behaviour (descriptors included: bullies others, fights with other children, hurts other children, cruel to others); and defiance (descriptors included: argues with teacher, does not answer when spoken to directly, refusal to comply with teacher requests). On a Likert scale, respondents identified which of these behaviours they found least to most problematic in the Limpopo classrooms. 83% of respondents indicated inattention and distractibility to be a major behavioural challenge. Within the focus group interviews, the majority of respondents linked such behaviours to the label of hyperactivity despite not having confirmed medical reports to substantiate their claim. With regard to bullying, 95% of the respondents indicated that this was also a major challenge. Within the focus groups, the majority of respondents confirmed that this mostly occurred on the playground and out of school, on the way to school or on the way home. Reasons given by

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

105

respondents for such behaviour were attributed to a lack of tolerance for difference. Defiance was not seen as a major behavioural challenge, with 76.9% of respondents on the questionnaire indicating it not to have been a significant problem. The general reason given for this during the focus groups was that learners are not given much opportunity to talk in the class, as one respondent indicated: “we talk and they must listen” (Focus Group 3: FG3). With regard to management of behavioural difficulties, the majority of focus group respondents admitted a strong reliance on corporal punishment. The majority of respondents conceded that they did not know what other forms of behaviour management to use in their classrooms. They reported that corporal punishment was a form of behaviour management condoned, and even expected of the teachers from within the parent body. The respondents further reflected that corporal punishment was possibly not the best form of punishment to use. Some responses related to this were recorded as follows: “I remember what I want to say… Oh, [I] want to say that many of these things [behaviour difficulties] are effects of corporal punishment, so children are not yet in the stage of getting used to be friends with teachers. So, that thing we as teachers still have to work on it. They are still… we are still struggling to let them be our friends and us being their friends, being free in class and engaging them in everything” [sic] (FG 8). “So, it’s like the channel [corporal punishment] is just a stigma in their minds, so we have to work and work and work until they, they see us as their friends, their parents, like being parent number two. Respect each other without hurting each other” [sic] (FG 8).

Parental involvement was highlighted as crucial in managing behavioural difficulties and respondents reported that parental support was lacking. A large portion of respondents identified that the practice of involving parents only when there were problems to be one of the potential reasons parents were not much involved in the lives of the their children at school. Other prevalent comments included parents being absent due to migrant work obligations, or illiteracy amongst older generations taking care of learners, as well as the challenge of childheaded families. A key reflective response regarding the non-involvement of parents was that the teachers were not intentional in their personal efforts when it came to building rapport with parents. Common respondent reflections included that they hardly ever asked about home circumstances and parent support. An example of one such remark is as follows:

106

Chapter Six “...so from now on I think I’m going to enquire; to be patient; to investigate what’s happening about my children; what’s happening in their families; how to intervene; [and] talking to their parents; because some of them are good, some are bad but as teachers we have to make sure that we take the risk; because it’s [ultimately] for the benefit of the child. We should change [our] attitude and look at our ignorance as teachers. But not all are ignorant, some are trying to intervene; from now on I think I’m going to enquire” [sic] (FG 7).

The interviews also revealed a strong sense from the teachers that their perceptions about behaviour had changed from thinking that children were “just naughty” to a deeper consideration of contextual factors in the learners’ lives. The themes that emerged regarding reasons for behavioural difficulties in FP included a lack of understanding of learner backgrounds (contextual factors included poverty, violence, abuse and child headed families). Some responses regarding family and home backgrounds are included below, giving a synopsis of the views raised by respondents in the focus groups: “ … and so when we started, we started with this module I came to understand some of the things, that some children don’t have behavioural problems just because they want to— sometimes it’s the influence of the background where they come from, [and] some get influenced [negatively], even at school” [sic] (FG 2). “ … after this module, I see that the first person to change being myself, because sometimes you find that we ignore some things or take some things not to be serious, when they are. Like the things the students see at home, like when the father and mother are fighting at home, they will copy from them; they will think that fighting’s the best way for them” [sic] (FG7).

With regard to poverty and child-headed families, focus group respondents agreed that children don’t always get the love and care needed from their parents or appointed caregivers, and perhaps this is sometimes absent altogether due to illness or death of their parents. One such example of this is described in the response that follows: “If you can see, if the child is not at school, she’s staying at home, he or she is staying with the guardian, not the parents; maybe, his or her parents has died, and then these people abuse that child. When she gets in class, she misbehaves somehow. If they don’t take care of him or her nicely, when she get to school, she want the love from the teacher, for attention from the teacher ... she can beat the other children, or do whatever, so that the teacher can [place] attention on him or her” [sic] (FG 9).

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

107

Another respondent reflected that: “...as a teacher, before coming to Wits [University] I thought that if the child is doing that [presenting behavioural difficulties], maybe he is trying to be naughty, [and I was] not considering the fact that you [might indeed] find that that child doesn’t have anyone to help him or her with his school work as they are all children at home. Then the elder one in the family, you will find is the grade 7 or grade 8 child, who also wants to play and also wants to do his school work, but she is a child at home and she is also a parent, and the age doesn’t allow her to be that [because she is overloaded]” [sic] (FG 9). .

Classroom management, teaching styles, poor teacher attitude and under-preparedness also emerged as contributing factors to the behavioural difficulties students’ exhibit in class. One respondent said: “ … teachers are not preparing their lessons, and now my observation is that, we teachers, we have this tendency of undermining our children[’s] minds and again we are not preparing our lessons. If on our arrival in Limpopo we’ll prepare our lessons thoroughly really like we doing here on our TEs [teaching experience] and we don’t undermine our children’s minds, really our children will—can—make it” [sic] (FG 9).

Themes also emerged related to continued need for parental support, but in this instance, in terms of parent education and collaboration, in order to understand the home background and its influence on the child. Respondents’ comments included the following: “I think for effective learning and teaching, as a teacher you must consider that you must create a healthy relationship between the family and the teacher, because if there is no relationship you don’t… you will not know what’s happening [to] the child, [you will not know] their background” [sic] (FG 6). “ … some parents, I noticed that it doesn’t mean they are ignorant for their children’s education, the only thing is that, they fear and they don’t know that it is their right to come to school and ask about their children’s progress” [sic] (FG 12).

The course evaluations regarding the behaviour support module pursued in this study revealed that the vast majority of Limpopo teachers found it useful in understanding the child within the context of the home, school and environment. Classroom-wide support including how to formulate and integrate classroom rules; differentiated teaching; teacher preparedness and functional behavioural assessments; was deemed most

108

Chapter Six

valuable. In relation to school-wide support, strategies for building parentfamily partnerships were found to be most valuable. Least valuable was the segment on bullying, as teachers felt there was an overlap with work previously done in other courses. Teachers indicated, however, that they would have liked to have more practical scenarios in relation to the application of functional behavioural assessments within the classroom context.

Considerations for further research and current research limitations The above findings signal the emergence of the potential efficacy of the PBS model in engaging students to critically reflect on their classroom practices in behaviour identification, management and support. Findings revealed that teachers developed a greater understanding of the need to view learners in the context of their interrelated environments, which includes an evaluation of teaching practices in the classroom. As in most research related to perceptions of participants, the possibility exists that participants may provide accounts of their experiences that may be very different from their actual practice. Further research in determining the feasibility of the PBS model would need to include classroom observations in the Limpopo primary schools, with the aim of determining amongst teachers the usefulness of the PBS model in their classroom practice. The role of the researcher as part of the research process is considered a possible limitation to the research, as it brings to the fore the complex role of the researcher, and the issue of power relations. Critical reflection was used in order to bring to the surface the notion that power is omnipresent in human interactions, and was considered to be a valuable tool in addressing the limitation that the role of researcher presents. One of the core purposes of critical reflection and reflective monitoring was considered in this research to be the externalising and investigating of power relations, as it forces the researcher to acknowledge the considerable power she may exercise during this research. Acknowledging publicly that a position of power (as lecturer, assessor, interviewer etc) has assisted in paving the way to engage participants in deconstructing that power, allows me to model a critical analysis of my own source of authority (Brookfield 2011). A further limitation is that the results of the study at present and also once completed will not be able to be generalised to a wider population or to different contexts. It is noted however that within the context and aims

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

109

of this study, the need to generalise findings is not considered of primary importance. This research aims to support in-service teacher training initiatives within the University of Limpopo, and as such the research participants are a purposive sample that, it is hoped, will generate meaningful and specific data for the purposes of meeting the goal of the research outcomes.

Conclusion Evaluating the contexts in which behavioural difficulties occur and are sustained is essential to understanding the behaviour as well as the possible support that could be offered to teachers in their responses to that behaviour. This chapter deals with the preliminary findings of research currently underway to determine the extent to which one model of behaviour support, namely the Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) model, could serve as an appropriate and effective tool in the identification and the support of learners with behavioural difficulties. The study understands behaviour and behaviour support from an ecosystemic perspective, and considers teacher training in behaviour support to be an imperative for all teachers, particularly those at pre-service levels. The results indicate that for the respondents, at a theoretical and self-reflective level, the PBS model emerges in order to show promise and value in analysing their own practice and beliefs related to behaviour and behaviour management. The model has aided respondents in developing an understanding of learners in their interrelated contexts. Furthermore, the model has resulted in respondents’ consideration of alternative behaviour support strategies, which include a more concerted effort in building stronger home-school partnerships, as well as improved teacher preparation, together with the careful planning of teaching content.

References Adams, D. 2011. Positivism goes to school: Positive behaviour supports from a disability studies lens. San Jose, CA. Society of Disability Studies Annual Conference 2011. Benedict, E.A., R.H. Horner and J.K. Squires. 2007. Assessment and implementation of behaviour support in preschools. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 26 (3): 174–192. Bronfenbrenner, U. and P.A. Morris. 1998.The ecology of developmental processes. In Handbook of child psychology, Volume 1: Theoretical

110

Chapter Six

models of human development, ed. R.M. Lerner. 993–1027. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Bronfenbrenner, U. 1979. The ecology of human development. Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press. —. 1986. Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology 22: 723–742. —. 2014. Ecological systems theory. In Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and new trends, ed. R.Vasta,187–249. London: Jessica Kingsley. Bronfenbrenner, U and S.J. Ceci. 1994. Nature-nurture reconceptualised in developmental perspective: A biological model. Psychological Review 101 (4): 568–586. Brookfield, S. 2011. Critical reflection as an adult learning process. In Handbook of reflection and reflective enquiry: Mapping a way of knowing for professional reflective enquiry, ed. N. Lyons, 215–236. New York: Springer Science and Business Media. Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice. 1998. Addressing student problem behavior. An IEP team’s introduction to functional behavioral assessment and behavior intervention plans. http://cecp.air.org/resources Accessed December 2011. Cohen, L., L. Manion, K. Morrison and K.R.B. Morrison. 2007. Research methods in education. New York: Routledge. Cooper, P. and G. Upton. 1990. An Ecosystemic approach to emotional and behavioural difficulties in schools. Educational Psychology 10 (4): 301–321. Creswell, J. 2008. Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Department of Basic Education (DBE). 2011. Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement Grade R–3: Life Skills. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education. Department of Education. (DoE). 2000. Alternatives to Corporal Punishment: The Learning Experience: A Practical Guide for Educators. Pretoria: Department of Education. —. 2001. Education White Paper Five: Early Childhood Education: Meeting the Challenge of Early Childhood Development in South Africa. Pretoria: Department of Education. —. 2002. Education White Paper Six: Special Needs Education: Building an Inclusive Education and Training System. Pretoria: Department of Education.

Investigation into the Feasibility of the Positive Behaviour Support

111

Donald, D., S. Lazarus and P. Lolwana. 2009. Educational psychology in social context. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. Dunlap, G. and E.G. Carr. 2014. Overview and history of positive behaviour support. In Handbook of Positive Behaviour Support, ed. G. Dunlap, G Sugai and R Horner, 3–16. New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC. Evans, J., A. Harden and J. Thomas. 2004. What are effective strategies to support pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties (EBDs) in mainstream and primary schools? Findings from a systematic review of research. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs 4 (1): 2–16. Johnston, J.M., R.M. Foxx, J.W. Jacobson and G. Green. 2006. Positive behavior support analysis. The Behavior Analyst 29 (1): 51–74. Lawrence, .J and D.M. Steed. 1984. European voices on disruptive behaviour in schools: Definitions, concern and types of behaviour. British Journal of Educational Studies 32 (1): 4–17. Marais, P. and C. Meier. 2010. Disruptive behaviour in the Foundation Phase of schooling. South African Journal of Education 30 (1): 41–57. Moll, I.C. 1984. The problem of content in the theory of formal operations: Piaget and Vygostky in the South African Context. Master’s dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand. Naicker, S. 1999. Inclusive Education in South Africa. In Inclusive education in action in South Africa, ed. P. Engelbrecht, L. Green, S. Naicker and L. Engelbrecht, 12– 23. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Papatheodorou, T. 2005. Behaviour problems in the early years. A guide for understanding and support. New York: Routledge Falmer. Pienaar, C and E. Raymond. 2013. Proactive management in inclusive classrooms. In Making inclusive education work in the classrooms, ed. C.F and E.B. Raymond,176–197. Cape Town: Pearson Education South Africa. Prinsloo, E. and V. Gasa. 2011.Addressing challenging behaviour in the classroom. In Addressing barriers to learning. A South African perspective, ed. E. Landsberg, D. Kruger and E. Swart, 490–507. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Punch, K.F. 2009. Introduction to research methods in education. London: Sage Publications. Swart, E. and R. Pettipher. 2011. A framework for understanding inclusion. In Addressing barriers to learning. A South African perspective, ed. E. Landsberg, D. Kruger and E. Swart, 3–23. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

112

Chapter Six

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). 1994. The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Paris: UNESCO. Utley, C.A., E. Kozleski, A. Smith and I.L. Draper. 2002. Positive behaviour support: A proactive strategy for minimising behavior problems in urban multicultural youth. Journal of Positive Behaviour Intervention 4(4): 196–207. Visser, J. and S. Stokes. Is education ready for the inclusion of pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties? A rights perspective. Educational Review 55 (1): 65–75. Whitt, P and S. Danforth. 2010. Reclaiming the power of address: New metaphors and narratives for challenging behaviours. In (De)Constructing ADHD. Critical guidance for teachers and teacher educators, ed. L.Graham, 145–192. New York: Peter Lang. Wood, F.H. and K.C. Lakin. 2005. Defining emotionally disturbed behavioural disordered populations for research purposes. In Behaviour problems in the early years. A Guide for understanding and support, ed. T. Papatheodorou, 39–50. New York: Routledge Falmer.

CHAPTER SEVEN METACOGNITION: A TOOL FOR A STRATEGIC-THINKING TEACHER WHEN MEDIATING IN THE CLASSROOM SHARON MOONSAMY

“The most distinctive characteristic of these very good teachers is that their practice is the result of careful reflection, of advance planning which predicts what might occur and which accommodates the particular needs of all their students whose strengths and weaknesses they know intimately. Nothing is left to chance. Moreover they themselves also learn lessons each time they teach, evaluating what they do and using these self-critical evaluations to adjust what they do next time” (Why colleges succeed, Ofsted 2004, 10)

Introduction Cognition and metacognition are debated concepts in educational psychology, and are embedded in the South African education curriculum. This chapter presents two arguments. Firstly those teachers who are aware of their own cognition should be able to demonstrate their thinking to students, and, secondly, that metacognition as a tool for reflective practice can be applied before, during, and on completion of the task. I argue that cognition and metacognition are known terminology, but are not explicit in classroom instruction because conceptually they may not always be easy to understand. Even though the concepts of cognition and metacognition are understood by teachers as fundamental to learning, it is not mandatory in several countries, and perhaps this may also explain why teachers do not demonstrate their thinking to students when teaching (Van der Walt and Maree 2007). Thinking is frequently assumed by teachers to be a spontaneously applied skill but effective thinking is not sufficiently evident in classroom contexts (Cottrell 2005, Haywood 1977). I thus make the case that

114

Chapter Seven

students can develop effective systematic thinking with explicit cognitive and metacognitive instruction. The students in the classroom may not always organise information in a systematic manner for effectual learning, and this is frequently evident in their haphazard presentation of information that is lacking in coherence. This type of ineffectual information organisation and presentation may be a result of the students not being consciously aware of how they think when approaching a task, which may result in impulsive outputs. Hence a key step to developing effective thinking is to develop an awareness of one’s own cognitive behaviours (Moonsamy 2011). The teacher needs to make the students in the classroom aware of the cognitive processes involved when learning. Lipman (2003) maintains that the teacher must create the awareness of both the method (process) and the subject matter (content) in deliberate classroom inquiry. Explicit teaching of metacognition (reflection, evaluation and monitoring) can thus be seen as an intervention in raising academic achievement. I think that it can be argued that students’ lack of exposure to and apprehension of higher order, and metacognitive thinking skills excludes them from increasingly complex subjects and levels of content. Explicit metacognitive instruction therefore supports making education inclusive, allowing all students to access and succeed in education. Consequently, I maintain that teachers who experience their own metacognition through reflective practice —when they prepare, teach and evaluate their lesson —will be encouraged to demonstrate to their students how teachers think and purposefully apply metacognition. In so doing, when executing a task, teachers will provide their students with an opportunity to experience the processes involved in their teachers’ thinking. Even though thinking is an abstract and dynamic phenomenon, I will attempt to operationalise the related cognitive concepts, providing a context for the arguments presented. This chapter is therefore a conceptual discussion on cognitive and metacognitive instruction, and I present strategies that the teacher may use to reflect on and to demonstrate their thinking to their students. When teaching and learning are couched in reflective practice, metastrategic knowledge should be established, as conscious awareness of your own cognition is necessary for successful thinking and learning. I introduce concepts including cognitive education, cognition and metacognition, instruction and reflective practice to develop the conceptual and contextual knowledge. This is followed by the metacognitive processes involving reflective practice at the different stages of planning and preparation, during instruction and on completion of instruction. Examples are used to structure the process, and the chapter

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

115

concludes with a discussion to support the arguments presented. The term “student” is used in this chapter to denote individuals who learn, across the grade, from pre-primary to tertiary levels.

Cognitive education Cognitive education has been promoted since the 1970s as a successful method of instruction in the classroom and it should be based on sound theoretical teaching and learning principles. Studies that report on cognition and metacognition in the cognitive and educational literature seem to agree that the concept of metacognition is more theoretical, but there are recent trends in publications towards studies being more evidence-based (Garton 2004). In addition, the studies on cognitive education are generally related to students who are at risk of academic failure as a result of various factors including low socio-economic status, learning difficulties and poor instructional methods, among others (Cèbe and Paour 2000, Naglieri and Johnson 2000). Haywood (2001) amongst others, however, indicates that cognitive education should be made available to all students. Most of the published studies focus on the student outcomes in cognitive education, with limited focus on the teacher’s instructional practice. Hence the significance of this chapter is the focus on teachers’ reflective practice when teaching in an inclusive context, which is becoming a reality in South African schools. Grösser (2007) states that the teacher in the classroom context is required to know the goal, plan the process, and carry out regular monitoring and evaluation of the outcomes. Teachers who therefore exercise metacognition consciously when preparing, teaching and evaluating their lessons should be able to demonstrate to their students their thinking process and how it influences teaching and learning.

Mediation: Classroom instruction The terms: instruct, teach or mediate in education refer to the process; i.e., the exchange that happens during teaching and learning between the teacher and the student. Feuerstein, Rand, Hoffman and Miller (1980) discuss 12 criteria of mediation, of which three are key for any mediation to be classified as having a high quality of instruction. These include intentionality and reciprocity, unlocking meaning and transcendence (Feuerstein, Feuerstein, Falik and Rand 2002, Tzuriel 2013). In addition, Vygotsky’s perspective of teaching and learning includes a more knowledgeable person who creates a shift in the learning through their

Chapter Seven

116

interaction with another individual (Vygotsky 1934, 1987). In the classroom the teacher should then be referred to as the more knowledgeable other, who through discussion should assist the student to achieve learning, thus promoting his/her potential. These mediational terms will link to the reflective practice that is discussed in this chapter. In a mediated environment, cognition and metacognition are important as learning does not happen in a void.

Cognition and information processing Cognition is a broad and inclusive concept, which includes cognitive functions such as attention, memory and perception, as well as social cognition, since mental processes are involved in all human psychological functioning (Flavell, Miller and Miller 1993). The cognitive functions: attention, memory, perception and social cognition do not operate in isolation, and their interdependence is essential for effective cognitive functioning. According to Flavell et al (1993, 3), “What you know affects and is affected by how you perceive, conceptualise and classify information, which influences how you infer, reason and ultimately think”. The human mind is generally described as a highly systematically organised entity with rich interconnections among its components. When information is processed, it can be done either sequentially or simultaneously (Owens 2014), and may also include both processing avenues. The different sources of information subsequently have to be integrated as a whole, for enhanced understanding. Hence a breakdown in how we process information will negatively impact our learning. The cognitive activity that occurs during processing can be understood as the information processing model, indicating different stages of processing. Feuerstein et al (1980) discuss this model as: input, elaboration and output and is indicated in Figure 7. 1. Input How is the information received? E.g. attention to the signal / stimuli

Elaboration How is the information processed? E.g. making comparisons between two concepts

Figure 7.1 Information processing model

Output How is the information expressed? E.g. speaking or writing

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

117

A breakdown at any one stage will negatively influence the processing of information. While the detail of this processing model is beyond the scope of this chapter, I reiterate that cognition is involved when processing information. The teacher should therefore bear this model of information processing in mind, as an awareness of the types of cognitive activities involved in teaching and learning should assist in the process of evaluation and monitoring, which are metacognitive skills. These metacognitive processes should promote changes in instruction to better facilitate the processing of information at any of these stages. Cognition and metacognition are related terms that are sometimes confused because of their abstractness. Van der Walt and Maree (2007) stated that even though each of these concepts has distinctive and important functions, both refer to effective teaching and learning. Flavell (1977) explained that the terms “cognition” and “metacognition” may be distinguished from each other precisely in how the information is used. Cognitive strategies are evoked to execute tasks and facilitate cognitive processing, whilst metacognitive strategies indicate reflection on thinking through monitoring, planning and evaluating the outcomes of the task the students are engaged in. The concept of metacognition involves active engagement with regard to the content and the processes involved in teaching and learning. Thus, “metacognitive activity can precede or follow a cognitive activity” (Livingston 1997, 2). I argue further that metacognition can also occur during a cognitive activity. The teacher can therefore use metacognition across all three time frames for any cognitive activity, i.e., before—when planning the lesson, during—while teaching, and after—when the lesson is completed.

Reflective practice: Metacognition Reflective practice in the educational literature embodies the concepts of reflection, evaluation, critical analysis, description and synthesis (Brigden and Purcell, accessed 11 December 2013). Hence reflective practice in this chapter is understood as metacognitive in nature. Lipman (2003, 26) defines reflective thinking as “thinking that is aware of its own assumptions and implications as well as being conscious of the reasons and evidence that supports this or that conclusion”. Reflection, in this discussion, is not seen as a passive exercise but rather an action of active problem solving and engaging of mental activity, a practice for both teachers and students. According to Rushton and Suter (2012, 8), life-long learning in the United Kingdom indicates that “reflection is an underpinning value and is key to becoming a professional teacher”.

Chapter Seven

118

Metacognition thus allows the teacher to focus on strategic thinking about higher-order constructs, with an alternative avenue for instruction, focusing on the process rather than just the product (Jacobs and Paris, 1987). Finally, a teacher’s reflective practice is encouraged by UNESCO (2009) as critical to inclusive education as it impacts on classroom praxis. This chapter supports the value of the teacher’s reflective practice, which will ultimately impact on the success of their students’ learning. Generating key questions at the different stages —before, during, and after the lesson—are fundamental for metacognition and these are presented next. Table 7.1 describes the types of questions that the teacher may use. Additional questions, depending on the subject outcomes, may also be formulated.

Metacognition: Before, during and after the lesson Before the lesson: Preparation stage When preparing the lesson, the teacher needs to approach the task exercising the cognitive strategies of systematic exploration, systematic planning and expression (See Table 7.1). Table 7.1 Questions that teachers need to consider at the preparation and planning stages Approach to task exploration Planning

Expression

What is known about the task? What steps need to be followed? Which mode of teaching would be appropriate to ensure that students express their understanding?

What needs to be done to complete this task successfully? What alternative plans need to be considered? Which assessment method would work best for this content?

Greenberg (2005) explains “exploration” as searching systematically for information needed for the learning experience, as not all information may be relevant. When a teacher generates a set of questions during preparation, this taps into prior knowledge of the topic under study. This process of formulating questions is an intentional act of thinking which applies the strategy of systematic exploration. Furthermore, reading or

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

119

gathering information for a particular purpose makes for effective time management and assists in processing information effectively. The teacher needs to consider several sources of information and by applying selective attention; he/she chooses only the information that is relevant to the goal (Greenberg 2014). Thus, to gather information when preparing the lesson requires the teacher to reflect on the following questions: x x x x

Who are my students? How much do they know about this topic/theme? How can I engage them and keep their interest and motivation? What questions can I use to draw on their experiences and to take them to new levels of learning? x What cognitive strategies do they know and what should they learn? This empowers the teacher with a flexible framework, integrating best practice with the praxis of teaching (Greenberg 2014). Secondly, in the planning stage, the information gathered has to be organised depending on the goal of the task. The steps or the plan selected must be appropriate, but changes need to be anticipated so that necessary shifts to the plan can be made if needed. The teacher should analyse the task to identify if it is graded as several new concepts introduced in one task will decrease information processing speed and comprehension. Therefore, the information processing stages discussed earlier need to be considered when planning. These two steps: exploring the information and planning are strategic and will inform the third stage: the expression stage or the execution of the lesson. It is important for the teacher to be aware that “thinking strategies learnt” do not guarantee creative and critical thinking (Rossouw 2013) just as “coverage of content” does not ensure learning (Cottrell 2005). Several thinking skills programmes in themselves do not ensure effectual thinking. Effective thinking only begins when there is a realisation of its importance and that the process of reflection (metacognition) is critical. Students, in addition to thinking strategies, will thus require their teachers to provide challenging tasks and to create opportunities for learning so that metacognition can be applied. This is an intentional commitment on the part of the teacher to develop this frame of mind for him/herself and for his/her students.

Chapter Seven

120

During the lesson: Teaching or mediating Despite the vast amount of curriculum that has to be covered, the teacher has an ethical obligation to educate all students (UNESCO 2005). The difficulties they observe, with regard to learning in the classroom, should create a cognitive conflict in the teacher so that the teacher is motivated to reflect and evaluate his/her instruction (see Table 7.2). Table 7.2 Factors that teachers should consider during mediation Mediational criteria

• • •

Strategies to encourage learning

•

•

Factors to consider

• • •

Is the aim intentional and clear? Are the students' attention and interest maintained? Is their learning being linked to other learning situations? How can students’ prior knowledge be accessed? What critical questions should be used? How can opportunities be created for students' to share information/thoughts and opinions? Knowledge, Application and Understanding [KAU] of information. Teacher feedback should stimulate learning Avoid redundancy in instruction

As teachers, we understand that intrinsic and extrinsic factors in the student may impact on our instruction (Tzuriel 2013), but mediated teaching practices, which refer to “good” teaching praxis should facilitate successful learning (Greenberg 2005). Quality classroom mediation according to Tzuriel (2013) includes three of Feuerstein’s 12 mediation criteria: intentionality and reciprocity, meaning, and transcendence or bridging, to link learning from the classroom to other learning situations. The mediational criteria, in addition to the concepts of verbal engagement, use of questions, feedback and pragmatics (social use of language) are discussed next. Mediated learning criteria The first criterion of mediation refers to the intent of the lesson and reciprocity with the students. To achieve the quality of mediation, the aim of the lesson should be intentional. The teacher therefore frames the aim so that reciprocity/rapport is established, which refers to the student’s interest, motivation and attention in the instructional discourse. This is

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

121

foundational for processing and learning (Rossouw 2013). The second criterion for mediation is the unlocking of the meaning of the topic being discussed. The critical question for the teacher should thus reflect, on how the content of the lesson can be made meaningful for the students, so that maximum understanding is achieved. These rules of engagement are crucial for mediation in any classroom. An example of a specific aim formulated for a science class is indicated in Table 7.3. Table 7.3 Mediated learning criteria Mediated learning criteria

Intent/aim/goal

Reciprocity/rapport

Unlocking the meaning of the topic Transference/bridging

Example of a science lesson For students to understand the following definitions in this task: Apparatus, method, conclusion, evaporation, condensation, temperature, convection, boiling, and freezing. Visual aids and experiments will be used to engage the students. Diagrams illustrating the water cycle. Experiments: to show condensation and evaporation. Teaching methods: explanations, definitions, comparisons, analogies, cause-effect, whole/part relationships. This involves generalisation, of the process and the content learnt in this lesson, to other learning situations.

Teachers need to engage their students verbally when introducing concepts. Knowledge schemas of the students are identified and new information can be shared, working within the zone of proximal development (ZPD) of the student. Explanations, definitions, comparisons, analogies and whole/part relationships, among others are cognitive processes, which can be utilised to build understanding of the content (Wittwer and Renkl 2008). The teacher is aware that such verbal discussions with the students should engage their cognition as well as their students’ cognition, developing an understanding of the content. The teacher thus uses questions to scaffold the thinking process, encouraging the students to explore their thinking, which should assist them in processing and planning the information. Questions that access the students’ prior knowledge are fundamental to ensure and consolidate

122

Chapter Seven

understanding. A precise and accurate understanding of the concepts involved in each topic is important, as a deeper understanding rather than a surface understanding is foundational for effective thinking (Erikson 2007). Through the process of questioning, teachers can identify and promote the generation of cognitive strategies used by their students. Discussion and the use of questions create in the students an awareness of their own cognitive abilities, instilling a sense of belonging, as their views are heard and they feel valued (Feuerstein, Feuerstein and Falik 2010, 59). When students discover the inner meaning, i.e., what value does this learning have?—the student should be motivated to learn (Greenberg 2005). Moreover, when the teacher monitors his/her instruction, redundancy in instruction can be decreased, as redundancy diminishes the students’ access of higher cognitive resources. If the instruction has excessive redundant information the students may be attending to information that may be irrelevant to understanding the content, and may lose interest, such that when higher order learning is required, they may no longer be attending. Instruction should be integrated with ongoing cognitive activities, so that information for the advanced student is not seen as redundant or to avoid the so-called “expertise reversal effect” (Wittwer and Renkl 2008, 57). Clear, concise instructions are therefore required for effective information processing. Students, who process information effectively, have better storage and retrieval of information (Owens 2014). Conceptual development, i.e., a deep understanding of the concepts, is essential for effective storage and retrieval of information, as transfer of knowledge to new learning situations is the ultimate goal (Erikson 2007). Shlomo (2001) indicates that the degree of learning can only be evaluated and transfer established if the student is able to access and retrieve schemas that are relevant to solve an identified problem. The student also needs the cognitive process of selective attention, i.e., focusing on what is relevant while ignoring irrelevant information, when achieving their goal. The avenue of verbal engagement also allows the students to share their experiences and present their different world views on the topic. The students make their implicit knowledge, explicit (Greenberg 2005). Moreover, this type of engagement builds new schemas for the students and the teachers, as learning and teaching cannot be separated. Such interaction supports the constructivist paradigm of learning, where active participation and social interaction build the knowledge-base required for learning (Donald, Lazarus and Lolwana 2010). Furthermore, students develop an understanding of the content when multiple perspectives are

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

123

presented (Owens 2014). Taking multiple perspectives is especially important in South African classrooms as a variety of world views are evident in its diverse school contexts. The teacher needs to stop and take cognisance of students’ processing skills as students do not process information at the same speed. Neither are all students auditory or visual learners, hence the mode of presentation needs to be considered to accommodate the different learning preferences (Mortimore 2014). When students engage in learning, cognitive conflict may be experienced. The teacher then mediates and assists the student in identifying the imbalance. This motivates the student to adjust and figure out the cognitive conflict. Dewey (as cited in Lipman 2003) states that students should raise questions, frame and define issues, and develop and test hypotheses. This process is managed by the teacher asking questions that create the shift in the student’s thinking, and to avoid telling the students the answer. The student then makes the cognitive accommodation to reduce the conflict and work out the solution, creating a sense of selfcompetence (Mentis, Dunn-Bernstein and Mentis 2008, 40). The challenge for the teacher is to “present these learning opportunities” or “challenging teaching moments”. The teacher should evaluate, monitor and reflect on the process and the subject content whilst teaching. The teacher’s application of reflective practice when teaching is an essential part of the mediational process, confirming the importance of being aware of your own cognition as a first step to making metacognition explicit in instruction. An additional value of verbal discussion is an opportunity for students to apply their language abilities (pragmatics) when constructing knowledge in a social context. Pragmatic skills, which refer to the social use of language, are also enhanced as the teacher and the students engage in turn- taking, topic maintenance, topic termination and conversational repairs of statements that may not be understood initially (Owens 2014). This exchange between the teacher and the students forms a partnership of learning in the classroom context. A strategic thinking teacher will aim to balance the focus between the content of the curriculum (product: what has to be learnt) and the thinking strategies (process: how to learn) as both are important processes (Haywood 2013). The teacher monitors the learning environment and provides feedback to the students on both content and process. Teacher feedback to students should be built into classroom instruction, as it informs both the teacher and the student of the cognitive processes involved in learning, and identifies the breakdowns in information processing. The purpose of feedback is to guide the

Chapter Seven

124

instruction and promote learning. When the teacher provides relevant feedback, the student is given an opportunity to reflect, revise and elaborate on their learning. It also provides the teacher with the platform for revising their instruction, material and sequence of presentation so that deeper understanding, better storage and retrieval are achieved. This supports the deep conceptual understanding of the content that the teacher is intentionally aiming for in their teaching objectives. The third criterion of mediation is transcendence. During the lesson the teacher would need to bridge the students’ learning to other learning situations so that application, generalisation and ultimately transfer can be attained. This process of transcendence that Feuerstein et al (1980) and Skye (1996) describe is built into the instruction, enhancing its quality. Haywood (2013, 28) states: “learning how to learn is far more important now than ever before because of the explosion of knowledge”. Transfer and mastery develops with practice, hence cognitive strategy retrieval and awareness of cognition is an ongoing process. Reflective practice after the lesson focuses on evaluating the content and processes involved in the learning, and are indicated in Table 7.4.

After the lesson: Evaluation of content and process This phase of metacognition is important for reviewing and revising the content and the process of the instruction (see Table 7.4). Table 7.4 Reflective questions to consider after the lesson Questions for the teacher

Teacher’s reflection on the students

• Were the lesson aims achieved? • What parts of the lesson worked and what didn't? • What should be done differently to achieve a better outcome?

• Did the students engage in the content? • Did the students engage in the process of learning?

As the teacher signposts this evaluative process, the students will begin to identify its value, as reflection can promote positive changes in their learning. In addition, the teacher may begin with a structured rubric as the student is a novice at reflective practice. A rubric is a useful visual organiser to evaluate learning, and can be used in conjunction with an application task. Because knowing and understanding are two different concepts and can sometimes be confused, the student needs to move from knowing to application and this should reflect their level of understanding.

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

125

The student’s “knowledge, application and understanding” (KAU) needs to be monitored by the teacher (Erikson 2007). The teacher can demonstrate to the students how he/she uses a rubric, when evaluating his/her own lesson. A teacher’s self-reflection with guided practice will result in student insight. Rushton and Suter (2012) indicate that reflection is central to successful learning for both the teacher and the student. Furthermore, Rossouw (2013, 12) states that thinking is “a necessity for scientific practice and not a luxury”. Hence, metacognitive practice is a tool for strategic thinking teachers.

Conclusion Cognitive education aims to bring students into the 21st century and to view the world as multi-dimensional, highly technologically complex and an interactive environment. It is therefore ethical practice for the teacher to provide relevant cognitive instruction to all students in school. Cognitive theorists such as Piaget, Dewey and Vygotsky indicate that optimal learning occurs when a match between cognitive level and instruction is achieved. This chapter argues that the teacher, through reflective practice, before, during, and after his/her lesson will contribute to best teaching practice. Some suggestions are provided to scaffold the process and with conscious application, the teacher should be able to achieve mandatory metacognitive practice. I argue that when the teacher engages in reflective practice their awareness of their cognition and metacognition increases, making their cognitive instruction explicit. The quality of the teacher’s instruction is reflected in his/her intentional focus of the students and maintaining their interest and motivation, while unlocking the meaning of the content and creating a link between the classroom and life-long learning. Haywood (2013) suggests that a balance between the content and the process is necessary for student success. Furthermore, the teacher and the student can identify where the breakdown in the student’s learning is occurring so that appropriate cognitive strategies can be accessed. Such learning can be applied to all tasks and the students should have a strategic approach that can be applied to new learning. Generalisation and ultimately transfer should include the content and the strategy use. This process of strategic thinking is not an automatic process for all students and would need the teacher to be the mediating link between the curriculum and the process of learning. Thinking classrooms can only be shaped if the teacher is intentional and explicit in his/her mediation, supporting the acquisition of cognitive skills and creating metacognitive

126

Chapter Seven

awareness in the students (Moonsamy 2014). The teacher’s instruction should therefore aim to make metacognition explicit. A strategic thinking teacher will see metacognition as a tool to achieving quality instruction for his/her students. This type of mediation will build interdependent and independent students, in this changing world (Greenberg 2005). Metacognitive thinking is an intervention that will boost academic achievement in all classrooms. It will provide access to learning, especially as higher order cognitive processing is expected in complex subject content. When introduced early, students will be familiar with academic language in instruction, creating the environment for abstract thinking. Such instruction will make education inclusive and is especially pertinent for redressing past inequalities in South African schools. Reflective practice is a continuous challenge for teachers and taps into their attitudes and belief systems about teaching and learning. Metacognition should assist the teacher to bridge the gap between theory and practice, making education relevant for the student. Moreover, teaching and learning would be considered within a socio-ecological framework and not as separate entities. The solution to establishing thinking individuals thus lies in the discovery of procedures that encourage both organisation of information and creativity. Furthermore, continued reflection on what teachers do in the classroom creates the basis for inventing improved practice that will in turn invite further reflections (Lipman, 2003), as reflective practice is a dynamic process. Education policies should make reflective practice obligatory, while creating collaborative mentorships for teachers so that best practice is attained. Such a paradigm shift is a journey and not an event.

References Brigden, D. and N. Purcell. Focus: becoming a reflective practitioner. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk Accessed on 11 December 2013. Cèbe, S. and J. Paour. 2000. Effects of cognitive education on learning to read in the primary grades. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 1 (2): 177–200. Cottrell, S. 2001. Teaching study skills and supporting learning. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Donald, D., S. Lazarus and P. Lowana. 2010. Educational psychology in social context. Ecosystemic applications in Southern Africa. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. Erickson, L. 2007. Concept based curriculum and instruction for the thinking classroom. Thousand Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

127

Feuerstein, R., Y. Rand, M. Hoffman, B. Mildred and R. Miller. 1980. Instrumental enrichment (IE). An intervention program for cognitive modifiability. Baltimore: University Park Press. Feuerstein, R., R.S. Feuerstein and L.H. Falik. 2010. Beyond smarter: Mediated learning and the brain’s capacity for change. New York: Teachers’ College Press. Feuerstein, R., R.S. Feuerstein, L.H. Falik and Y. Rand. 2002. The dynamic assessment of cognitive modifiability: The learning propensity assessment device: Theory, instrument, and techniques. Jerusalem: ICELP Press. Flavell, J.H. 1977. Cognitive development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Flavell, J.H., P.H. Miller and S. A. Miller. 1993. Cognitive development, 3rd edn. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Garton, A.F. 2004. Exploring cognitive development: The child as a problem-solver. Oxford: Blackwell. Greenberg, K.H. 2005. The cognitive enrichment advantage. Teacher handbook. Knoxville: KCD Harris & Associates Press. —. 2014. Cognitive enrichment advantage. In Schools as thinking communities, ed. L. Green, 141–160. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Grösser, M. 2007. Effective teaching: Linking teaching to learning functions. South African Journal of Education, 27 (1): 37–52. Haywood, H.C. 1977. A cognitive approach to education of retarded children. Peabody Journal of Education, 54 (2): 110–116. —. 2001. Clinical application of cognitive education. Journal of Cognitive and Educational Psychology, 2 (1): 22–36. —. 2013. What is cognitive education? The view from 30,000 feet. Journal of Cognitive and Educational Psychology, 12 (1): 26–44. Jacobs, J.E. and S.G. Paris. 1987. Children’s metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22: 255–278. Lipman, M. 2003. Thinking in education, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Livingston, J. 1997. Metacognition: An overview. http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/metacog.htm Accessed August 2014. Mentis, M., M. Dunn-Bernstein, M. Mentis and M. Skuy. 2009. Bridging learning: Unlocking cognitive potential in and out of the classroom, 2nd edn. Thousand Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Moonsamy, S. 2011. Effectiveness of metacognitive instruction on reading comprehension among intermediate phase learners: Its link to the

128

Chapter Seven

PASS theory. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. —. 2014. Thinking classrooms: How to recognise a thinking classroom. In Schools as thinking communities, ed. L. Green, 49–60. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Mortimore, T. 2014. Supporting learners at risk for dyslexia. Conference on Dyslexia., Bellavista School, Johannesburg, South Africa., February 2014. Naglieri, J.A. and D. Johnson. 2000. Effectiveness of a cognitive strategy intervention in improving arithmetic computation based on the PASS theory. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33 (6): 591–597. Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted). 2004. Why colleges succeed. www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/why– colleges–succeed Accessed January 2014. Owens, R.E. 2014. Language disorders: A functional approach to assessment and intervention, 5th edn. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Rossouw, D. 2013. Reasons for developing thinking skills. In Intellectual tools: Skills for human sciences, 2nd edn., ed D. Rossouw, 10– 15. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Rushton, I., and M. Suter. 2012. Reflective practice for teaching life-long learning. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press. Shlomo, K. 2001. Teaching for transfer from the learner’s point of view. Journal of Cognitive and Educational Psychology, 1 (3): 266–293. Skuy, M. 1996. Mediated learning in and out of the classroom. Cognitive research program, University of the Witwatersrand. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight Training and Publishing. Tzuriel, D. 2013. Mediated learning experience and cognitive modifiability. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 12 (1): 59–80. United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). 2005. Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001402/140224e.pdf Accessed January 2014. Van der Walt, M., and M. Kobus. 2007. Do mathematics learning facilitators implement metacognitive strategies? South African Journal of Education, 27 (2): 223–241. Vygotsky, L.S. 1934/1987. The history and development of higher mental functions. In The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Vol 4, ed. R.W. Rieber. New York: Plenum Press.

Metacognition: A Tool for a Strategic-Thinking Teacher

129

Wittwer J., and R. Alexander. 2008. Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43 (1): 49–64.

CHAPTER EIGHT USING ADAPTIVE CO-MANAGEMENT TO IMPROVE PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WITWATERSRAND ANNE FITCHETT

Introduction It is well established that people with disabilities face considerable difficulties when pursuing tertiary education (Chard and Couch 1998). This is particularly true for those who have impaired mobility. A typical day on a university campus requires rapid movement both within and between numerous buildings that are often spaced far apart. This is challenging even to physically mobile academic members of the university community. Few, if any, of the universities in South Africa were originally built with mobility for the disabled as a conscious design concern. This has become a consideration relatively recently, requiring retrospective adaptation to accommodate routes that facilitate wheelchairs and other forms of assisted mobility to allow disabled students and lecturers to access facilities required for their university programmes. In many instances, access is not guaranteed even for the venues required for the compulsory elements of the curriculum (Hall and Belch 2000). Increasing numbers of disabled students and staff, in conjunction with a more inclusive agenda, has required universities to review the accessibility of their facilities. Such an initiative is challenging to architects, urban planners and facilities management who now need to address the difficulties of retrofitting buildings within limited budgets and without compromising existing functionality. Moreover, the discourse on accessibility has expanded in recent years to include psychological and social needs (Jarrow 1993, Hall and Belch 2000; Meyers, Anderson, Miller, Shipp and Hoenig 2002, Church and Marston 2003), in contrast to the more mechanistic approach driven by building codes and technical

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

131

design guidelines. The limitations of the conventional code-based attitude to accessibility is expressed by Meyers et al (2002, 1436): “…[O]nly relatively crude and static tools to measure environmental effects upon people with disabilities have been developed. Most current measures note compliance with a standard that may itself be arbitrary … rather than a standard based on operational impact upon people with disabilities. We infer that if ramps do not exceed specified angles of incline; or if curbcuts have specified surfaces; or if lighting falls within certain parameters of intensity, that we have facilitated access (and these may be eminently reasonable inferences). However, people with differing impairments may have differing needs for environmental accommodations. Our current methods of measurement do not allow us to characterize the interaction between individuals and environments in rigorous and systematic ways.”

A review of the literature on accessibility for people with physical disabilities (Iwarsson and Stahl 2003), highlights a cluster of concerns that include the physical environment (Useh, Moyo and Munyonga 2001), social discrimination (Hall and Belch 2000), and psychological dimensions such as fear and lack of choice (Church and Marston 2003). This combination of factors calls for an inclusive and adaptive approach, in which the knowledge, experience and expertise of a range of participants is actively solicited. One approach is that of adaptive comanagement1, the application of which is described here in a pilot project to improve the accessibility of the Education Campus of the University of the Witwatersrand. This chapter is a critical reflection of the process that has characterised this pilot project to date, analysed from the perspective of adaptive co-management. From this analysis, a proposal for the direction for the future of this project and recommendations for expansion to the whole of this University’s facilities is presented. At the University of the Witwatersrand, several factors compound the complexity of adapting existing buildings to improve accessibility for people who require assisted mobility, or who may have other difficulties in manoeuvring this spatial environment. The University’s city-based facilities are located on five dispersed sites, all of which are situated on sloping terrain that has been modified with terraces and stairs. The buildings date from 1922, with incremental

 1

Adaptive co-management can be defined as an approach to the management of ecosystems that is founded on the collaboration of a diverse set of actors as a means of addressing complexity and uncertainty (Fitchett 2013).

132

Chapter Eight

growth throughout the University’s 90 year history. Several new capital works are currently being undertaken within and around existing buildings. Few of the buildings, even the most recent ones, have been designed with accessibility as a priority. Many of the older buildings are regarded as important to the City’s heritage and are difficult to adapt without compromising their architectural character (Chipkin 1993). In the 1980s, several wheelchair ramps were introduced to facilitate movement in the central area of the original campus. Over the years, there have been piecemeal adaptations, including a limited number of accessible toilets, stair lifts and other enhancements. These were generally installed to meet the needs of specific members of staff. More recently, the facilities management unit of the University, in conjunction with the Disability Unit, has embarked on plans to improve access between buildings and within them, and make provision for the upgrading of toilets, lecture venues, laboratories and other facilities for users of wheelchairs and to cater for other special needs.

South African policy and legislation on accessibility Although the rights of people with disabilities are enshrined in the South African Constitution (Republic of South Africa (RSA) 1996), legislation and regulations supporting this principle are not rigorous. New projects and building alterations in the private sector are bound to comply with the National Building Regulations (NBR) (Maritz 2008, South African National Standard (SANS) 10400-S 2011) which require basic provisions. For example, only a single route that meets the accessibility requirements is required, and only into the ground floor of a building. Clauses include phrases, such as “reasonable number of persons who use wheelchairs” (NBR 2008, clause S2.1.f) and “adequate parking space” (NBR 2008, clause S2.2), which are open to interpretation and allow building owners to provide minimal facilities. Enforcement takes place only when plans for new building work or major alterations are submitted to a municipality for approval. Existing buildings have no compliance requirement. Part S of the National Building Regulations is given clarity through SANS 10400-S (2011). This provides detail on parking layouts, signage and route design, with specifications for ramps and handrails, toilet design, auditoriums, and positions of electrical plugs and switches. SANS 10400-S includes extracts from other legislation relating to provision for people with disabilities. In South Africa, most public sector buildings are constructed under the direction of the Department of Public Works, being bound by neither the NBR nor

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

133

SANS 10400-S. The Department of Public Works has produced a set of guidelines (Department of Public Works (DPW) 2001) for consultants employed to design and oversee the construction of government buildings. These guidelines are more comprehensive than NBR Part S or SANS 10400-S, but there are no external mechanisms to ensure compliance. Moreover, in all of these official documents, there is provision for discretionary relaxation of the requirements in existing buildings with heritage status, or where application of the regulations or guidelines would be excessively costly (Maritz 2008, 42). University buildings do not fall into the categories of building types covered by the National Building Regulations or South African National Standard, as they are built “by or on behalf of the State” (NBR, clause 2.4). Plans are submitted to local authorities as a courtesy, to inform the municipality for the purposes of fire prevention and infrastructure connections (Maritz 2008, 78). Moreover, universities commission new buildings and alterations independently of the DPW, Furthermore, the policies of the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) with regard to people with disabilities are silent on physical facilitation. The result is that they are bound by no regulations, standards or guidelines, and any provision for people with disabilities is entirely selfmotivated.

University of the Witwatersrand Education Campus The selection of the Education Campus (Fig. 8.1) of the University of the Witwatersrand as the site for piloting a co-ordinated accessibility approach was driven by several physical and institutional factors: x Most of the buildings on this campus are of similar date (1960s), designed to a single master-plan. x There have been several accessibility interventions over the years, including stair lifts, wheelchair accessible toilets and external ramps. x The campus has a variety of functions beyond the usual seminar rooms and lecture theatres, including specialised tutorial and laboratory venues ranging from music practice rooms to carpentry workshops. x Some of the buildings are highly accessible, for example, the Linder Auditorium which is an important public venue for classical music concerts. Other facilities, such as the buildings of the Wozani Block for Art and Music, are extremely inaccessible and

134

Chapter Eight

difficult to adapt. External spaces, including a variety of sporting facilities, likewise range in accessibility.

Figure 8.1 University of the Witwatersrand Education Campus. (After Ludwig Hansen Architects + Urban Designers 2013, adapted by J. Fitchett 2013.)

The School of Education has a supportive institutional environment, with its own dedicated Disability Unit personnel, venue management and facilities maintenance unit. At the time of beginning the pilot project, all of the facilities were owned by the School of Education in the Faculty of Humanities. The Head of School at the time expressed a particular commitment to improving the campus to address a variety of special needs. This combination of physical and institutional factors allowed for a comprehensive, yet manageable, approach to be developed, that could later be scaled up to the remainder of the University properties. The process that evolved has a number of similarities with adaptive co-management, a method devised for participation and stakeholder engagement that has become valuable in the management of complex environments.

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

135

Adaptive co-management Adaptive co-management emerged in the early 1990s in response to vulnerable aquatic environments (Berkes, George and Preston 1991). It has been defined as: “...[A] governance based approach aimed at dealing with complexity and uncertainty… which relies on collaboration among a diverse set of actors, and on a form of social co-ordination in which actions are co-ordinated voluntarily by individuals and organisations in a self-organising and selfenforcing manner.” (Cundill and Fabricius 2009, 3206)

The focus is on social learning, co-production of knowledge to inform action, a continual process of learning and adaptation, and stewardship or governance of a physical environment through a collaboration of a range of participants. It offers an inclusive structure for planning and action. Expert knowledge is partnered with experiential knowledge; formal institutional structures are enriched by social and cultural frameworks (Berkes 2009). While the management of sensitive ecologies is far removed from the design and management of urban environments to improve accessibility, adaptive co-management offers an alternative to current practice. Design guidelines and legislation for accessibility are generally underscored by concepts such as “reasonableness”, which presuppose that provision for accessibility is an additional cost and constraint, competing with other objectives. Roulstone and Prideaux (2009, 362) explain this attitude: “...the predominant views of disability are still based on a medical model of disability: one which categorically constructs disabled people as the problem”. Citing Finkelstein (1980), their argument continues thus: “Within this frame of the established medical model of disability, ‘Reasonableness’ suggests piecemeal placatory steps meeting disabled people half-way. This runs counter to the social model which is underpinned by a philosophy of social justice where disabled people have fundamental human rights to participate in and have access to those environments that nondisabled people take for granted.” (Roulstone and Prideaux 2009, 363)

An adaptive co-management approach challenges these predominant views on several grounds.

136

Chapter Eight

Governance and inclusiveness Strategic and tactical decisions in an adaptive co-management scenario are made through collaboration of a grouping of stakeholders, typically comprising formal government agencies, non-governmental organisations, end users and professionals (Ruitenbeek and Cartier 2001). In contrast with conventional participative models, all stakeholders have an equal voice in the planning, implementing, monitoring and adaption of interventions. Governance is underpinned by the principle that all participants contribute to the strategic planning, evolution of policy, implementation, and monitoring of the physical environment: these processes are no longer the sole preserve of experts.

Local knowledge systems In an ecological context, scientists espousing adaptive co-management have taken the bold step of acknowledging indigenous knowledge systems not just for their social value or to gain acceptance from local communities, but as scientifically valid alternatives to “Western scientific method” (Lane and McDonald 2002, Johnson 1998). A parallel in the context of accessibility is exploring the knowledge and understanding that people confined to wheelchairs have of their physical surroundings. Architects, urban planners and facilities managers tend to view the problem of accessibility in terms of building codes and guidelines, often flagging “hot-spots” for attention. By contrast, a person with mobility constraints will consider their environment more holistically, as a series of alternative routes, each with qualitative or measurable advantages.

Continual learning and feedback loops The adaptive element of adaptive co-management speaks to the fundamental principle that all interventions are constantly monitored, measured and reviewed iteratively (Armitage, et al 2010). This is in clear contrast with the conventional planning process that aims for a final idealised situation, designed and implemented by those with expert knowledge in compliance with legislation and building codes. An adaptive approach is inherently staged rather than master-planned, allowing for refinement of design of elements and enhancement of routes as they are put into use and critiqued by users. This is particularly effective in a university environment that has an in-house maintenance unit with the capacity for minor building works. Moreover, it is a highly effective use of

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

137

resources, in that incremental tactics that are less than optimal are not replicated, but modified in the next step of the process and routes that emerge as being less or more popular can be given the appropriate attention and action. Adaptive co-management highlights the importance of considering all stakeholders as equal partners, understanding that each player or group could provide valuable insights. Armitage et al (2010, 996) describe how this process is forged through the collaborative production of knowledge, from which a more integrated understanding of the problem can be generated. To a large extent, this begins to address progressive thinking on accessibility that considers a complex set of factors, rather than merely defining a set of physical standards that need to be met: “Disability is thought to result from interactions between individuals and environments, which, in turn, consist of complicated arrays of social, cultural, political, climatic, topographic, architectural, and technologic components.” (Meyers et al 2002, 1435)

As a method that evolved specifically in the face of complexity and uncertainty, adaptive co-management offers insight into a far more inclusive approach to the design and management of the physical realm for universal accessibility. Cundill (2010) outlines the key features of this approach, in which the importance of shared interests, concerns and purpose are highlighted. An organisational characteristic is that the ground-rules and objectives emanate from the group itself, through which the status quo may be challenged and creativity encouraged. The emphasis on social learning and institutional transformation makes this method particularly relevant in the context of higher education.

Evaluating the Education Campus The three main teaching buildings of this campus (Fig. 8 1) are three to four floors high, with a split level arrangement at the eastern end of each, linked by staircases. They are joined to the administrative building by an elevated corridor that has a ramp to ground level near the main bus stop. When the pilot programme started, the northern-most teaching block (Bohlaleng Building, Fig.8.1) had a goods lift to serve the student canteen and staff tea room. Wheelchair accessibility was by means of a stair lift in this building. The complex of four buildings had only one toilet accessible to wheelchairs. The pilot study was initiated by one of the physically disabled staff members who had encountered many difficulties with the

138

Chapter Eight

stair lift and in being able to move between lecture venues, her office and the accessible toilet in the short breaks between lectures.

Institutional structure A Disability Interest Group, representing the whole University, was formed immediately prior to the pilot study, bringing together staff of the University Disability Unit, educators and students with a personal or pedagogic interest, representation from various administrative units, the University Planning Office, and the maintenance unit. For the pilot study, a smaller sub-group was formed with educators from the School of Education, an architect member of staff, staff from the Education Campus Disability Unit, the venue manager, and the head of the maintenance unit. The small size of this group allowed for cohesion and individual commitment, given that much of the strategic and tactical planning was carried out through round-table discussion. The implementation was done largely as a series of micro-interventions, each one of which fed into the learning process.

Process The Education Campus group carried out a series of in situ surveys with a wheelchair user to identify difficult routes, barriers and other concerns. A number of recurring problems were flagged, particularly those associated with piecemeal application of building codes and guidelines. These included ramps that lacked handrails or used materials that flexed under the load of a wheelchair, and a toilet that fully met the accessibility guidelines, but was barred by both a step and narrow lobby (Fig. 8.2, Fitchett 2010). These apparently minor obstacles can become major barriers when several occur close together. In the example shown in Fig. 8.2 the user of a wheelchair cannot mount the step and turn within the space constraints. This characterises many of the problems identified throughout the pilot and in the subsequent surveys of the facilities on other campuses. Designers and facilities managers follow the guidelines for individual elements, but do not always visualise the complete sequence of spaces that the user would need to traverse to reach their destination.

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

139

Figure 8.2 Access to change-room and disabled toilet showing step and narrow lobby.

With the insight of these site visits, the architect in the group surveyed and mapped the entire Education Campus, including those areas and facilities that were completely inaccessible to the wheelchair user. In parallel to this mapping exercise, a questionnaire was circulated to academic staff to evaluate teaching spaces as a means of flagging problems within the venues and to gain better insight into targeting key rooms for immediate action. The group then discussed the most urgent and critical spaces and routes for attention, given the current needs of staff and students. The relatively small number of affected students and staff on this campus allowed the Disability Unit staff to interact with each of them personally, and to have an insight into the unique problems and aspirations of each one. This allowed for planning for the near future, as the students’ intentions for the courses that they planned to take in higher years could be determined, leaving time to put any necessary interventions in place. Many of the problems could be resolved through simple and inexpensive techniques, such as ramps from street level to pavements in the area around the bus stop, as well as outdoor paving and more robust ramps into buildings. The type and quality of outdoor surfacing is critical in summertime when thunderstorms saturate grassed areas and make certain paving types too slippery for wheelchair traction. Ingenuity from the maintenance staff allowed these minor works to be carried out within the normal maintenance budgets. This was done in close

140

Chapter Eight

collaboration with the facility users, so that each step in the process could be monitored and refined. More costly interventions, such as the refurbishment of toilets throughout the three main teaching blocks, were financed through the support of the Head of School, with the budget programme increased incrementally over three years. This allowed for much easier financing, as well as adhering to the principle of learning from each individual element. It should be noted that the exceptional support and flexibility of the head of the maintenance unit was critical to the success of this approach. At the same time that these urgent interventions were being identified, the group worked on identifying a scenario that would allow access to the full range of facilities on the Education Campus, including the various sporting venues. Many of these are extremely challenging, either through difficult building configuration or through external level changes. This scenario also explored concerns such as the immediate visibility of access points and routes, with much discussion about signage and electronic mapping that could be accessed through mobile phone for first-time users of a space or route. Interventions important for linking up venues that are not immediately urgent for the current users, and which would be difficult or expensive to implement, were also mapped. These would require fundraising and possibly complex contractual arrangements, as they would fall outside the scope of the campus maintenance unit. Typically, these include ramps or lifts to replace the stair lifts, more extensive external ramps, and toilets where the existing ones did not have the space for the necessary renovations. This three-phase approach formed the basis for longer-term planning and financing, ensuring that the short-term activities would not compromise the bigger vision. It should be noted that all phases of the plan are open-ended, as elements of each can be modified and reconsidered, based on the feed-back loops generated through the implementation process.

Lessons and reflections Accessibility guidelines and legislation provide a valuable starting point for designers and facilities managers, but their limitations were revealed through the process undertaken in mapping and creating an action plan for the University of the Witwatersrand Education Campus. From a purely physical perspective, the distance and associated time required to move between venues are often not given priority. This is especially significant in a university context, given the limited time allocated between activities (Church and Marston 2003). Moreover, people with

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

141

impaired mobility will already be at a disadvantage in relation to time: all of their day-to-day activities can be expected to take longer than those of the average fully mobile person. The most obvious consequence of this is that lectures may be missed, compromising the student’s academic performance. This said, it is often difficult to find space to accommodate the widths of ramps to provide adequate manoeuvrability and the length needed for adequately gentle gradients. The net result is that ramps are often relegated to “the back door”, or squeezed into leftover spaces that are not clearly visible. This impedes choice, in that the destination of a ramp or accessible route may not be clear. Vertical circulation that relies on mechanical systems (conventional and stair lifts) is shown to have a cluster of problems for its users: a dedicated lift requires either key or card access limiting access to regular users (Maritz 2008). Power outages render them useless, and jeopardise the safety of users who may be stranded on upper levels; stair lifts are unreliable, frightening and compromise free access for other users. Furthermore, the introduction of a stair lift prevents the original staircase from being classified as part of the fire evacuation system, potentially compromising the safety of all of the building users. Meyers et al (2002) argue that mobility is influenced as much by psychological and social factors as the built environment. Confidence, independence, dignity and choice all contribute to a person’s ability and desire to move. In a university context, this is especially important: a fully rounded academic experience relies as much on social interaction, diversity of learning spaces and recreational options as it does the more formal engagement of lectures, seminars and tutorials. Guidelines and regulations tend to emphasise minimum standards, rather than providing guidance on a holistic approach and, as a result, fall short on experiential aspects. It is these, in particular, where the actual users of the facilities bring valuable insight. The Education Campus study revealed numerous difficulties when analysed from this more inclusive perspective that combined the experience of people with physical disabilities and the expertise of a psychologist, an architect and the maintenance unit personnel: x Interventions tend to be driven by building codes (SANS 2011) rather than holistically and strategically, and are largely restricted to toilets and ramps or other means of vertical circulation, which are often cut off from preferred routes by obstacles.

142

Chapter Eight

x Accessible routes are often tortuous, tucked away and not fully visible, and lead to service entrances that need special access provision, such as a key, card access or call button. x The lack of mapping and signage makes it difficult for people to plan their route, know their options and feel comfortable about exploring new areas. x Some floor surfaces within buildings are too slippery for safe traction, while outdoor areas are often irregular, damaged or intersected with channels, hanging tree branches, small building and maintenance works, temporary structures and other apparently minor or non-permanent obstacles. x Choice of route and/or facility is limited: only the bare minimum to comply with building codes is provided, which prevents a full experience of university life, especially with regard to social, recreational and sporting activities. The process of determining these difficulties included: observation; physical exploration in a wheelchair and on foot; consultation of local and international guidelines and discussion among the various stakeholders mentioned above.

Scaling up the process The pilot study of the Education Campus gave a clearer strategy for embarking on plans to improve the physical accessibility of the more challenging central campuses. These have a greater range of building types and ages, spread over a larger site area. Buildings are “owned” by a variety of Schools, Faculties and administrative units, making it more difficult to establish the type of governance structure that was possible on Education Campus. Despite these challenges, a site survey of the East Campus was undertaken by two students who use wheelchairs, one of whom is a postgraduate in Architecture. This working study, undertaken in 2011 and 2012, drew on the experiences of the pilot project on the Education Campus. The first phase of this survey was carried out in conjunction with the Director of the Disability Unit and the architect who was involved with the pilot study. At the same time, the maintenance unit of the University began a mapping exercise of the external areas of the West Campus on which a number of major capital works projects were being constructed. The more commonly recurring problems included the number of buildings that did not have any reception area on the ground floor; inability to access upper floors and toilet facilities that had poor

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

143

entrance design. External areas were mainly compromised by the lack of convenient ramps, a particular challenge in the steeper areas. Close collaboration between staff and students associated with the Disability Unit, the Campus Planning Unit and the maintenance department appears to be leading to a more integrated approach that responds as much to the needs and aspirations of users as it does to the building codes. An indication of this is expressed in the vision of the Director of Campus planning: “bringing ALL building users to the front door” (Prinsloo, pers. comm. 2013). This radical shift in thinking bodes well for a more rights-based orientation towards physical planning of the University’s facilities.

Conclusions Accessibility is only one of many competing objectives that need to be addressed by architects and urban planners in the design and construction of the built environment, and for facilities managers throughout the life of a building and its surroundings. Maritz (2008) argues for more stringent monitoring and enforcement of accessibility clauses in the building regulations, as well as the extension of their sphere of application to include existing buildings in the private sector and all public buildings. Universities are in a unique position to be able to serve as exemplars to the rest of society, especially those that espouse inclusive and democratic values. They have the intellectual resources to take the lead in relation to the processes that are undertaken in the evolution of a more equitable and inclusive physical environment. Moreover, the institutional frameworks and in-house service units allow for a high level of integration. This chapter explores how these two characteristics can be fused into a coherent approach to the evolution of universally accessible campuses, and not just ones that meet the technical “minimum standards” described in the legislation. The purely technical approach has been challenged by authors arguing for social justice and a rights-based approach (Riddel et al 2007), which necessarily requires the involvement of the end users at both the strategic (planning) and tactical (implementation) stages, whether the building work contemplated is a new facility or the upgrading of an existing one. The experience of developing an upgrading plan for the Education Campus is testament to the adaptive co-management approach of inclusive governance in decision making and monitoring; collaborative learning in which the knowledge and experience of all role-players is given equal

144

Chapter Eight

respect and continual learning and adaptation in an incremental framework.

References Armitage, D., F. Berkes, A. Dale, E. Kocho-Schellenberg and E. Patton. 2010. Co-management and the co-production of knowledge: Learning to adapt in Canada’s Arctic. Global Environmental Change 21: 995– 1004. Berkes, F., P. George and R. Preston. 1991. Co-management: The evolution in theory and practise of the joint administration of living resources. Alternatives 18: 12–18. Berkes, F. 2009. Indigenous ways of knowing and the study of environmental change. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 39: 151–156. Chard, G. and R. Couch. 1998. Access to higher education for the disabled student: A building survey at the University of Liverpool. Disability and Society 13 (4): 603–626. Chipkin, C. 1993. Johannesburg Style: Architecture and society 1880s– 1960s. Cape Town: David Philip. Church, R.L. and J.R. Marston. 2003. Measuring accessibility for people with a disability. Geographical Analysis 35 (1): 83–96. Cundill, G. and C. Fabricius. 2009. Monitoring in adaptive co– management: Toward a learning-based approach. Journal of Environmental Management 90: 3205–3211. Cundill, G. 2010. Monitoring social learning processes in adaptive comanagement: Three case studies from South Africa. Ecology and Society 15 (3): 28–47. Department of Public Works (DWP). 2001. Standard Electrical, Mechanical and Architectural Guideline for the Design of Accessible Buildings (Facilities for Disabled Persons). http://www.publicworks.gov.za/PDFs/consultants_docs/DISABLED.P DF. Accessed 18 October 2013. Finkelstein, V. 1980. Attitudes and disabled people. New York: International Exchange of Information in Rehabilitation. Fitchett, A.S. 2010. Toilet access, Physiotherapy Building. Author’s photograph, 27 March 2010. —. 2013.Adaptive co-management in the context of informal settlements. Urban Forum. http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/124/art%253A10.1007%252Fs 12132-013-9215-

Using Adaptive Co-Management to Improve Physical Accessibility

145

z.pdf?auth66=1392874522_7179b3bec5f6dacdebcc942fa5988e1cande xt=.pdf Accessed 12 July 2014. Hall, L.M. and H.A. Belch 2000. Setting the context: Reconsidering the principles of full participation and meaningful access for students with disabilities. New Directions for Student Services 91 (5): 5–17. Iwarsson, S. and A. Stahl. 2003. Accessibility, usability and universal design: Positioning and definition of concepts describing personenvironment relationships. Disability and Rehabilitation 25 (2): 57–66. Jarrow, J. 1993. Beyond ramps: New ways of viewing access. New Directions for Student Services 64: 5–16. Johnson, M. 1998. Lore: Capturing traditional environmental knowledge. Collingdale, PA: Diane Publishing. Lane, M.B. and G. McDonald. 2002. Crisis, change and institutions in forest management: The Wet Tropics of northeastern Australia. Journal of Rural Studies 18: 245–256. Ludwig Hansen Architects + Urban Planners. 2013. University of the Witwatersrand Education Campus Map, adapted by J. Fitchett. Maritz, D. 2008. Determining the extent of compliance in the built environment regarding accessibility for physically disabled persons. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Tshwane University of Technology. Meyers, A.R., J.J. Anderson, D.R. Miller, K. Shipp and H. Hoenig. 2002. Barriers, facilitators, and access for wheelchair users: Substantive and methodologic lessons from a pilot study of environmental effects. Social Science and Medicine 55: 1435–1446. National Building Regulations (NBR). 2008. National Building Regulations and Building Standards Act No. 103 of 1977. Pretoria: Government Printing Works. Republic of South Africa.1996.Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, No. 108 of 1996. Statutes of the Republic of South Africa. Pretoria: Government Printing Works. Riddel, S., E. Weedon, M. Fuller, M. Healey, A. Hurst, K. Kelly and L. Piggott. 2007. Managerialism and equalities: Tensions within widening access policy and practice for disabled students in UK universities. Higher Education 54: 615–628. Roulstone, A. and S. Prideaux, S. 2009. Constructing reasonableness: Environmental access policy for disabled wheelchair users in four European Union countries. ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 3: 360–377. Ruitenbeek, J. and C. Cartier. 2001. The invisible wand: Adaptive comanagement as an emergent strategy in complex bio–economic

146

Chapter Eight

systems. Occasional Paper No. 34. Bogor (Barat), Indonesia: Centre for International Forestry Research. South African National Standard (SANS). 2011. SANS 10400-S: The application of the National Building Regulations Part S: Facilities for persons with disabilities. Pretoria: SABS Standards Division.

CHAPTER NINE PARENTAL PERCEPTIONS OF DISABILITY JANE MUTASA AND NANCY RUHODE

Introduction Disability is a phenomenon that is not welcomed in many societies. People with disabilities have been disregarded, pitied and treated as subhuman or animals (Reynolds 2010, 202–203). These perceptions were succinctly summed up by Groce (2005, 1) that “there has yet to be a society found anywhere in the world that does not have a complex system of beliefs concerning disability”. According to Reynolds (2010, 202), a respondent in a Ghanaian study confided that, “I think our culture looks for good things and when children are lamed or disabled, it is not well accepted”. Through the efforts of our present generation, this negative attitude towards fellow members of society should come to an end. The passage of time and other societal reforms resulted in a number of international initiatives such as the institutionalisation of people with disabilities. This development was based on the medical approach to development and promoted discrimination and exclusion. Other members of society and disability activists were not in agreement with this approach. The negativity towards the medical approach to disability issues resulted in a shift to a rights based approach. Albert (2004, 4) aptly observes that “Human rights are a central part of work to achieve the human development targets because they provide a means of empowering all people to make effective decisions about their lives”. The success of inclusion and community based rehabilitation is partly determined by the efforts and perceptions of people with disabilities, their families and their communities in meeting the needs of people with disabilities. In support of this, UNESCO (2009) noted that teachers, parents and communities are more than a valuable resource, they are the key to supporting aspects of

148

Chapter Nine

the inclusion process. This may lead to the minimisation of stigmatisation and increased support for inclusive education. Inclusive practices have ushered in changes such as the shift in the educational placement of some categories of persons with disabilities from special schools to a number of inclusive regular schools. These are schools that enrol pupils with mild to moderate disabilities and educate them in the same classroom with non-disabled pupils but with additional support given. Nevertheless, some negative practices have persisted as demonstrated in some marginalisation tendencies that still prevail. Such negative practices include denying some of the children with profound or multiple disabilities access to education. UNICEF (2013) reported that the National Association for the Care of the Handicapped (NASCOH) is concerned that 52% of disabled children in Zimbabwe have no access to education. This study focuses on issues of disability from the perspective of participants who only experience disability at community and not at nuclear family level. The outcome of this study will be an indicator on the impact of inclusion on perceptions of people with disabilities. In this study, all the different disabling conditions are combined under one term, disability, and referred to as such in this chapter.

Background Inclusion is the contemporary educational perspective in which all children and young people with and without disabilities or difficulties learn together with appropriate networks of support (UNESCO 2009). Zimbabwe, motivated by the realisation of the progressive impact on its population, especially among those with disabilities, due to globally agreed upon treaties, accepted the practice of inclusion by being a signatory to, and joining in a number of participatory international conventions and initiatives. These initiatives include the World Programme of Action (1983), the Decade of Disabled Persons (1983– 1992), the Jomtien World Declaration on Education for All (1990), the Standard Rules (1994) and the Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action (1994). On 23 September 2013, Zimbabwe signed The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2008). These treaties have guided policy formulation and have been the blueprint for the initial establishment of an environment of integration in Zimbabwe. Integration was eventually upgraded to inclusive practices where circumstances permitted.

Parental Perceptions of Disability

149

At the outset, it is important to take heed of the observation by Leyser and Kirk (2011) that the extent to which inclusive practices are implemented is influenced by cultural, political, social and economic contexts and various other interpretations of the concept. In Zimbabwe, the commitment to adopt the integration policy was effected in 1987 as expressed by Peresuh and Barcham (1998, 252) that: “Government’s responsibility has extended further to the development of a policy of integrated provision for most children with special needs (including deaf children), teacher training, procurement of equipment and the monitoring and co-ordination of the Special Needs Education Programmes.”

According to the Schools Psychological Services and Special Needs Education Vision 2020 document, there are three types of integration setups where pupils operated, i.e., at the locational (social) stage, the transitional stage, and the functional or full integration stage. The term integration was then in use even if what was in practice in certain establishments was full inclusion. Pupils with disabilities were categorised into those with hearing impairment, visual impairment, mental impairment, physical impairment, speech disorders and multiple impairments. Presently, the categories of some of the pupils with visual and physical impairments are operating at full inclusive level in Zimbabwean regular schools while some are integrated. This study was conducted at schools and in classes practising full inclusion.

The role of parents of non-disabled students in inclusive practices The combined role of parents of children with, and without disabilities, is vital especially in the inclusive process where the philosophy of learning and general operation is dependent on the participation and co-operation of both entities. Leyser and Kirk (2011) support this observation by stating that parents have a major role in the development of successful inclusive programmes. Parents supply the resources required, supervise children’s homework and participate in a number of school projects. According to Reichart et al (cited in Duhaney and Salend 2000, 121), parents can also be instrumental in successful inclusive placement of their children. They are key stakeholders in that they reserve the right to enrol or withdraw the child from the programme. Because parents are particularly affected by the impact of inclusive programmes on their children, they can also be instrumental in providing feedback on the academic, social and

150

Chapter Nine

behavioural development of their children (Giangreco et al and Ryndak et al, cited in Duhaney and Salend 2000, 121). In this respect, deliberate effort needs to be made to involve them as much as possible in major activities of the school. Bennet, Deluca, and Burns, (1996), Reichart et al (1989), and Salend (in Duhaney and Salend 2000, 121), concur that a significant factor that contributes to the development of effective inclusive programmes is the involvement of parents of children with and without disabilities in the inclusive process. They can collaborate with school staff, district personnel and community members to create and support inclusive education programmes. These collaborative relationships between home and school are hypothesised to result in high academic achievements and positive attitudes as well as improved and more successful behaviours. However, the extent to which parents perform roles that support inclusive placement of their children may depend on many factors. Some of these are their perspectives and reactions concerning inclusive educational programmes and practices. It should be noted that the attitudes and reactions of parents of children with and without disabilities toward inclusion appear to be complex and multi-dimensional and affected by a variety of interacting variables (Green and Storeman 1989, Palmer, Borthwick-Duffy and Widaman in Duhaney and Salend 2000, 123). It can also be said (albeit unfairly) that generally, the parent of the non-disabled student reserves the greater right to withdraw his/her child from an inclusive school environment than does the parent of a disabled child. To a lesser extent though, some parents of children who are d/Deaf or experience other impairments prefer segregated placement. Either way, parents of children without disabilities or parents of children with disabilities call for persuasion in order to remain in the inclusive alliance. In this respect, the role of the spouse or partner of the decisive parent needs to be understood well in order to tap into the potential they possess to change attitudes towards an inclusive environment. The main issue that impacts on behaviour is the perceptions of parents that arise from the belief they hold on the causes of disability. According to Reynolds (2010), beliefs about how disabilities arise and what constitutes a disability appeared to influence how people with disabilities were viewed and treated in society. For instance, parents who subscribe to the belief that disability is contagious will not allow their child to learn in an inclusive class. Such parental reactions impact pedagogical issues and provide valuable feedback on the inclusive practice. There is need to note that perceptions on inclusion do not emanate from educational practices only, but also from health profession and sociocultural beliefs on health and the resultant practices. These perceptions

Parental Perceptions of Disability

151

influence how people understand health and disability. Reynolds (2010) further argues that spiritual traditions and beliefs influence how individuals with disabilities are treated and accepted in the general community. Established beliefs form a strong background as the basis of decisions made by parents or primary care givers and this may have lifelong consequences for the children involved.

Theoretical framework This study is guided by the social constructivism model that views disability as a social construct. According to Baffoe (2013) social constructions are actions of society in erecting barriers and structures that limit the ability of certain persons in society to function “normally.” In this case it is the inclusion of children with disabilities in Zimbabwean regular schools and the reactions to this move by parents of children without disabilities whose children attend the same school. Previously, the medical model, which proffered that disability was caused primarily by disease, trauma or other congenital conditions, was used. In contrast, the social model which views disability in a broader social context was adopted in this study. Byford and Veenstran (2004) state that disability is created by the social environment. For instance, where negative meanings are associated with people with disabilities, then behaviours, objects and language associated with people with disabilities will be negative. This follows that if meanings held about persons with disabilities are positive then they will receive preferential treatment from society. Anastasiou and Kauffman (2011) give a five point condensed foundational and interconnected thesis of the social constructionist model. Firstly, they redefine impairment and express it as culturally produced and socially structured as opposed to the definition of impairment being concerned with abnormalities of body structure and system functioning resulting from any cause (Hughes and Paterson 1997). Secondly, they do not view disability as a product of bodily pathology but of specific social and economic structures (Oliver 1992). Thirdly, they argue that social and economic structures disable and impair people by excluding them from full participation in mainstream activities. Hahn (1985, 1989), Liggett (1988) and Silvers (in Anastasiou and Kauffman 2011, 371) view people with disabilities as an oppressed minority group. The fourth point looks at the goal of the disability rights movement which advocates for the removal of barriers imposed by social structures and attitudes. Among other issues, the model promotes social inclusion of people with disabilities. The fifth point sums it all by stating that disability is not a personal tragedy.

152

Chapter Nine

According to Oliver (1996, 371), “Nothing is wrong with persons with disabilities that needs to be fixed but what is needed is a change in society.”

Cultural perspective of disability The endeavour to get the views of participating parents in the inclusive programme is to establish the model that influences disability practice in Zimbabwe. This can only be understood by looking at the cultural aspects that prevail in a given society. Culture has always had a place in the field of special education but systematic efforts to understand the links between culture and the field of study are still underway. This research seeks to make a contribution to close this knowledge gap. According to Byford and Veenstran (2004) an understanding of socio-cultural context of disability is pivotal to disability prevention and rehabilitation. Culture is often defined as a group of people’s way of life consisting of predictable patterns of values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours (Mandell and Novak 2005). This emphasises the need to ground research and subsequent intervention in the given cultural framework of the participants involved. Equipped with this cultural knowledge, practitioners will be forewarned of what to expect before offering a service and so plan from an enlightened perspective. This study adopts the theoretical orientation advocated by Berry (1999). Berry identified three theoretical orientations applicable to research involving cultural differences. These are the absolutist, relativist and universalist orientations. This study is interested in the universalist position of the middle ground. According to Berry (1999) human characteristics are universal but cultural background influences the meaning and displays of these characteristics. Following this theoretical guidance, this study surmises that the way disability issues are handled in Zimbabwe is ostensibly the same as the rest of the world, but that the interpretations and deeper decisions made are determined by the cultural elements that participants hold. Understanding these cultural elements enables operations to be conducted from a common ground. In general, perceptions of people appear to be modernised but indigenous cultural beliefs might be playing a significant role in interpreting occurrences of disability. According to De Andrade and Ross (2005), reports from developing countries have shown that public awareness and attitudes towards disability in childhood are generally poor and aggravated by superstitious customs and beliefs. The same authors report on a study in South Africa regarding superstitious beliefs related to

Parental Perceptions of Disability

153

hearing loss indicating that aspects such as bewitchment by ancestral spirits and blood impurities may be commonly attributed as the cause of hearing impairment. Reynolds (2010) reports on a potential barrier to progress which included non-biological based beliefs about what caused disability. These beliefs were reported to resonate strongly with many Ghanaians. Reynolds (2010) further reports that most of the informants indicated that they knew disabilities were caused by various medical or environmental factors but identified that traditional spiritual beliefs were still prevalent in the country and in their own communities. Flores (in Mandell and Novak 2005, 112) points to the compelling example of fatalism in some Latino cultures where the belief is held that individuals can do little to alter their fate. This type of perception by families is likely to result in the affected not seeking medical attention. In some instances, the general impression from these participants was that disability was blamed on the family concerned. Pulsford and Cawte (in Byford and Veenstra 2004, 173) observed that Papua New Guineans tended to interpret misfortune as a failure of the person to adhere to important social rules or as the evil work of an enemy. It was the general belief that the disabled child’s family was to blame for the occurrence of that condition. Studies by Croot, Grant, Cooper and Mathers (2008) in Pakistan showed that the perceptions that people held on causes of disabilities were explained as punishment and or a test from God, a curse or work of evil spirits. On another level, disability in some families can be clearly seen to be associated with handicapping conditions in the parents’ family. The families in such situations correctly perceive their child’s disability to result from heredity.

Research questions x What are beliefs on the causes of disabilities, of parents of nondisabled children? x How has the parents’ understanding of pedagogical issues related to disability and inclusion changed? x What new perspectives have the parents developed on disability issues since their involvement in the inclusive alliance?

Method A descriptive case study design under the qualitative paradigm was employed to gather data on the perceptions of parents of non-disabled students on disability issues in Harare, Zimbabwe. This design enables the

154

Chapter Nine

researcher to explore a bounded system (case) through in-depth data collection that may involve multiple sources of information amongst them interviews (Creswell 2007). The case study enabled parents of nondisabled students to share their views and experiences on disability.

Participants and setting The participants were 15 (4 males, 11 females) parents of non-disabled students learning with disabled students in diverse regular schools in Harare Region. In the age range of 20 to 30 years there were two females. All males and five females were aged between 30 to 35 years and the other four females were aged between 35 to 40 years. Seven of the parents were formally employed while nine of them were self-employed in the buying and selling business. Eleven of the participants had completed and passed Ordinary Level with more than five subjects while the other four had attended school up to grade 7 primary school level. Participants were also trained in different professions such as: accounting (2), fitter and turner (2), horticulture (2) and marketing (3). Only six were non-skilled workers. Five were unemployed. Most participants were married and six were single parents. The parents were coded according to the category of impairment of students that their non-disabled children were learning with. The areas of disability were: visual, hearing, physical and learning. There were also those with epileptic fits. The number of participants according to this grouping and the codes used are as follows: physical impairment (N = 2, code Ph/Imp), hearing impairment (N = 4, code H/Imp), visual impairment (N = 1, code V/Imp), learning difficulties (N = 6, code L/Diff), Epilepsy (N = 2, code Epi).

Instruments The study used the structured interview guide. The interview guide was pre-tested on four parents of non-disabled children to establish validity and credibility of the questions. Appropriate modifications were made to the questions.

Procedures Purposive sampling was used to select participants. Specialist teachers at regular schools with a policy of inclusion identified parents of nondisabled children in the inclusion class. Teachers provided the researchers

Parental Perceptions of Disability

155

with contact details of the prospective participants. Initial verbal informed consent was sought by telephone and in-depth interviews were conducted with three parents. Written informed consent was sought and face-to-face interviews were carried out with the remaining 12 parents. In all cases, the researchers assured the participants of the anonymity and confidentiality of their responses. Specialist teachers who served as support persons in the inclusion schools were asked to provide information on parental perceptions on disability issues through an unstructured interview. Their responses were then triangulated with parental responses as a way of checking on credibility. Data were subjected to thematic analysis in which descriptive and interpretive coding was used to identify and interpret major themes from the interviews. The meanings of these themes were then interpreted and linked to theory and literature.

Results Perceptions of the causes of disabilities The majority of the participants (80%, n=12) indicated that they had not put much thought into the causal issues of disability before the inclusive process. One male respondent commented as follows: “[I]t’s one of those mishaps, I would just see these children and what ran into my mind was how to assist them, you know, it was far from me to think how it happened, it’s for you women to go into details” (V/Imp).

Respondents knew that disabilities could arise from many factors. Asked to expand on the factors, 13% (n=2) stated that despite the known factors that cause disability, the general tendency that still prevailed among people is to blame the mother of the child. This kind of thinking is elaborated by Reynolds (2010) who points out that to the family, the negative connotations often associated with disability affect the mother throughout the rest of her life (Pulsford and Cawte 1972). The blame on women could be an attempt to highlight the possible contribution of genetics to disability. However, this could emanate from either side. According to Milaat et al (2001), disability in the child, on the other hand, was found to be significantly associated with a history of handicapping conditions in the parents’ families, and this was inclusive of both men and women. However, blame tended to be mostly levelled against the woman.

156

Chapter Nine

Causes of disability The following are some of the responses received on the causes of disability. Respondent (L/Diff-4) cited hereditary and congenital causes. Respondent (H/Imp-2) indicated that the abandonment of cultural practices led to the increase in the incidence of disability. She had this to say: “The causes are due to birth challenges, lack of medical care and food. Parental care is also lacking in some cases. This is because people are now ignoring the Zimbabwean culture of kusungira.”

Kusungira is a practice among Shona people in which an expectant mother who is pregnant for the first time, is sent to her parents until the birth of the child. Within Shona culture, failure to follow this practice leads to disabilities (P/Imp-1). About 53% (n=8) cited nutritional deficiencies. Respondent L/Diff-3 had this to say: “Long back, people in Zimbabwe used to eat natural foods and wild fruits and these were balanced nutritionally and the incidence of disability was low then. Now we lack these nutrients and hence we are prone to having more of our offspring disabled.”

Another respondent (H/Imp-1) cited witchcraft as one cause of disability. She gave an account of her cousin who was allegedly bewitched and he eventually became mentally disturbed. On how they viewed the causes of disability after exposure to inclusion, one participant (Epi-1), said there were a number of factors but what she now knows is that disability conditions were not contagious. She continued by saying that people had weird explanations about epilepsy but her child’s experience of learning (as someone who usually has seizures) made her change the way she understood the condition. The mother can now correctly manage a seizure when one arises. Another respondent (Ph/Imp-1) said: “Some causes can clearly be seen that they are a result of an accident and so correctly be attributed to an unplanned misfortune though some would insist that the accident was caused by spiritual forces and evil spirits.”

She indicated that religious persons would attribute it to satanic or evil spirits while traditionalists would implicate ancestral spirits that might be angry. Such perceptions on disability can best be understood within specific cultural contexts. Respondent L/Diff-1 explained that she viewed some disability conditions as natural and gave examples of children who

Parental Perceptions of Disability

157

are dyslexic. She explained the condition in medical terms on the same issue of learning difficulties. Respondent H/Imp-3 cited a case of parents who changed their church after their child, who was an above average performer, suddenly developed eyesight problems and subsequently his performance deteriorated. The participant interpreted the action of the parents in explaining their child’s disability challenge as being guided by a superstitious model. The perceptions that participants held on the causes of disabilities were varied. Both supernatural beliefs and medical orientations were used to explain causes of disability. According to Reynolds (2010, 202), these beliefs are not limited to rural regions only but may also persist in developed and urban regions of the more educated and perpetuation of these beliefs is detrimental to progress. Reynolds sums up the issue by indicating that: “… although traditions and spiritual beliefs must be respected, education about the causes of disability and the potential for overcoming disabilityrelated impairments should be considered as part of government efforts to improve the acceptance of people with disabilities and their families.”

Organisational aspects Organisational aspects were related to how the learning of children with disabilities was organised. Parents of non-disabled students had to state whether the arrangement of leaving children with disabilities in the mainstream class was ideal or if they had other options. The majority (73%, n=11) of the parents of non-disabled students felt that children with disabilities were better left learning in their own self-contained classrooms but at the mainstream school. Parent H/Imp-1 said: “This spares them stiff competition in the mainstream class.” Parent Ph/Imp-1, who aired the same view, had this to say: “Irrespective of counselling children without disabilities to accept their disabled counterparts, it takes time. Children being who they are, may laugh at those with disabilities, hence making them feel aware of their difference, especially on issues of low performance.”

In support of making the children with disabilities learn by themselves, parent H/Imp-2 said: “This allows them to learn at their own pace using specialised equipment with specialist teachers. Effective learning will take place instead of the

158

Chapter Nine mainstream class where the classes are large and the attention they receive is little.”

On responding to how the parents were informed of the inclusive organisation, respondent Epi-2 answered: “The head informed us that there were children with challenges such as learning disabilities, physical impairments and other similar conditions who were going to learn at this school. Newsletters were also sent.”

Pedagogical aspects This section relates to the teaching of the children with disabilities. Parents of non-disabled students were asked to give their views on how they rated the learning of their children and that of students with disabilities. They indicated that they were not quite certain if their child might not imitate, or be affected physically, medically, socially and academically by associating with, persons with disabilities. Bailey and Winton (cited in Duhaney and Salend 2000, 122) observed that parents overcame their initial doubts regarding the instructional effectiveness of an integrated setting for their children (including whether their children would emulate the negative behaviours of children with disabilities) and whether their children would receive adequate services and enough teacher time. Half of the participants (50%) were open about the performance level of the majority of children with disabilities who were not receiving adequate support. They indicated that they had not seen anything additional in the classrooms that were meant for supporting these children with special needs. Respondent Epi-2 commented: “Besides the carpet in the class for those with hearing impairment, I did not see anything else in the other classrooms where those with disabilities are learning together with our children…”

Respondent L/Diff-2 commented that during his/her school days children with learning difficulties used to learn on their own and they competed on their own and this was motivating as opposed to the inclusive set-up where they would find it difficult to compete with their nondisabled counterparts. He/she had this to say: “I have never heard my child say they have performed highly. Only a few of them excelled or competed at equal levels with children without disabilities.”

Parental Perceptions of Disability

159

Such poor performance by children with disabilities has been reflected in the grade 7 national examinations results in Zimbabwe. This aspect is supported by Reid (2010) who points out that special education has not produced a better quality life for children with disabilities. Instead it has produced a drop-out rate twice that of general education, and has led to low rates of employment amongst the disabled. All participants seemed not to have noticed much change in the learning or performance of their non-disabled children. However, the presence of students with disabilities was cited by Reichart et al (1989) to have assisted non-disabled children to develop appropriate behaviours and there was no limiting of the amount of teacher attention given to them. Participant H/Imp-2 indicated that during the first phases of inclusion, it was difficult to communicate with the child with hearing impairment and that this was a challenge. Participant L/Diff-3 stated that the inclusion setup gave children (both disabled and non-disabled) the opportunity to explain concepts to each other. Participant Epi-1 commented that his/her child indicated that in their class there was stiff competition and at times the children without disabilities could not cope themselves. The study by Peck, Carlson and Helmstetter (in Duhaney and Salend 2000, 123) revealed that parents’ ratings indicated that their children exhibited an improved feeling of self-worth from helping others, an increased sense of personal development and a greater tolerance of human differences.

Other lessons learnt by parents of non-disabled students Parents of non-disabled students assumed that children with disabilities were temperamental but noticed better behaviour from them. Leyser and Kirk (2011) report that many mentioned the social benefit of inclusion, not only by providing opportunities for socialisation and friendship for their child but also by fostering understanding and acceptance of individual differences by classroom peers. In addition, Reichart et al (1989) support this view by saying that placing students in integrated settings: x x x x

Increased the self-concept of students with and without disabilities Promoted positive social contact among children Facilitated an acceptance of individual differences Did not influence children without disabilities to act in an immature manner or to engage in inappropriate behaviours.

160

Chapter Nine

Respondent Ph/Imp-1 related how her child had made friends with her physically impaired classmate and reported missing her when she was absent from school. This account is evidence that children soon get over individual differences and establish strong bonds among themselves even in the presence of challenges such as disability. Parents in a study by Duhaney and Salend (2000) felt integration was beneficial and tended to promote the acceptance of children with disabilities, exposing them to the real world. Generally, all respondents expressed that they had developed a new perception of children with disabilities irrespective of the type of disability. Participants learnt that children with disabilities were the same as any other child. In this respect, positive developments are now showing in developing countries with persons living with disabilities becoming increasingly accepted. According to Reynolds (2010) although there is still progress to be made, the cultural perceptions of disability in developed countries suggests that there is an effort towards the acceptance of individuals with disabilities into society; a shared willingness to provide the services, training and equipment to those who need it; and an acknowledgement that individuals with disabilities can contribute to their society.

Conclusion This study looked at inclusion from the perspective of parents of nondisabled students, mainly to rate the achievements of this practice to date. In any alliance, the true quality of services provided can only be obtained through consulting all stakeholders. This study has shown both negative and positive developments related to this noble development of educating students with disabilities, in Zimbabwe in particular, and the world in general.

Summary The perceptions of parents of non-disabled students have been reviewed in this study. These related to parental views on causes of disability, the impact of an inclusive learning set-up on children and the knowledge parents gained on issues of disability. Knowledge on these issues was important because according to Reynolds (2010) beliefs about how disabilities arise and what constitutes a disability appeared to influence how people with disabilities were viewed and treated in society. Both negative and positive views on causes of disabilities were expressed.

Parental Perceptions of Disability

161

The performance level of the children in the inclusive learning setup was not affected as their educational attainments progressed as expected. The parents of the non-disabled students had learnt a lot on disability issues and this had facilitated the socialisation of the parental groups and the general inclusive process. Directly tapping into the perceptions of the parents of non-disabled children provided first-hand information as opposed to indirectly getting the parents’ perceptions through the observations of school administrators and teachers. However, in-depth interviews with school administrators and teachers could have produced data from two other sources to allow triangulation, thus improving on study validity and reliability. Future studies could make a comparison of the perceptions of both parents of disabled and non-disabled children as they are all significant stakeholders in the inclusive alliance.

References Albert, B. 2004. The social model of disability, human rights and development. Disability Knowledge and Research [KaR]: http://www.handicap-international.fr/bibliographie-andicap/1 Handicap/ModelesComprehension/socialModel.pdf Anastasiou, D. and J. M. Kauffman. In press. The social model of disability: Dichotomy between impairment and disability. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. —. 2011. A social constructionist approach to disability: Implications for special education. Exceptional Children 77 (3): 367–384. Baffoe, M. 2013. Stigma, discrimination and marginalisation: Gateways to oppression of persons with disabilities in Ghana, West Africa. Journal of Educational and Social Research 3 (1): 187. Berry, J. W. 1999. On the unity of the field of culture and psychology. In Social psychology and cultural context, ed. J. Adamopoulos and Y. Kashima: 7–15. London: Sage Publications. Byford, J. and N. Veenstran. 2004. The importance of cultural factors in the planning of rehabilitation services in a remote area of Papua Guinea. Disability and Rehabilitation 26 (3): 106–175. Creswell, J. W. 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. London: Sage Publications. Croot, E. J., G. Grant, C. L. Cooper, and N. Mathers. 2008. Perceptions of the causes of childhood disability among Pakistani families living in the UK. Health and Social Care in the Community 16 (6): 606–613.

162

Chapter Nine

De Andrade, V. and E. Ross. 2005. Benefits and practices of Black South African traditional healers regarding hearing impairment. International Journal of Audiology 44: 489–499. Duhaney, L. M. G. and S. J. Salend. 2000. Parental perceptions of inclusive educational placements. Remedial and Special Education 21 (2): 121–128. Groce, N. E. 2005. Disability cross-culturally. http://www.empowerzone.com/crossdb.txt Accessed November 2011. Hughes, B. and K. Paterson. 1997. The social model of disability and the disappearing body: Towards a sociology of impairment. Disability and Society 12: 325–340. Leyser, Y. and R. Kirk. 2011. Parents’ perspectives on inclusion and schooling of students with Angelman Syndrome: Suggestions for educators. International Journal of Special Education 26 (2): 79–91. Milaat, W.A., T.M. Ghabrah, H.M. S. Al-Bar, B. A. Abalkhail and M.N. Kordy. 2001. Population-based survey of childhood disability in Eastern Jeddah using the ten questions tool. Disability and Rehabilitation 23 (5): 199–203. Oliver, M. 1992. Changing the social relation of research production. Disability, Handicap & Society 7 (2): 101–114. —. 1996. Understanding disability: From theory to practice. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan. Peck, C.A., P. Carlson and E. Helmstetter. 1992. Parent and teacher perceptions of outcomes for typical developing children enrolled in integrated early childhood programs: A state-wide survey. Journal of Early Intervention 16: 53–63. Peresuh, M. and L. Barcham. 1998. Special education provision in Zimbabwe. British Journal of Special Education 25 (2): 75–80. Reichart, D.C., E.C. Lynch, B.C. Anderson, L.A. Svobodny, J.M. Di Cola and M.G. Mercury. 1989. Parental perspectives on integrated preschool opportunities for children with handicaps and children without handicaps. Journal of Early Intervention 13: 6–13. Reynolds, S. 2010. Disability culture in West Africa: Qualitative research indicating barriers and progress in Greater Accra Region of Ghana. Occupational Therapy International 17: 198–207. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). 2013. Disabled Zimbabwe children face serious challenges. http://m.voazimbabwe.com/a/unicefchildren-with-disabilities-facing-challenges/1680208.html Accessed 20 June 2013.

Parental Perceptions of Disability

163

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). 2009. Policy guidelines on inclusion in education. Paris: UNESCO.

CONCLUSION SHARON MOONSAMY

Inclusive practice within education is, and will continue to be an ongoing conversation, as challenges arise as a result of changes in need (including disability and diversity) and context. It is clear that while adjustments and small scale improvements can be made by individuals and groups, making education inclusive represents a fundamental reform of the way we do education. Pockets of good practice offer evidence that things could be different, but they are often so grounded in contextual idiosyncrasies that they seem impossible to replicate. Despite this, various key issues in making education inclusive have been identified in the chapters of this book.

Public policy Policies for inclusive education cannot make education inclusive, but they can act as leverage in the quest for more inclusive education. This leverage is enhanced if these policies are linked with other policies on social inclusion, social justice, language and health, so that synergies are created, with quality education for all being the aim. This reflects a holistic perspective to educational transformation and should influence how exclusion is targeted by education systems (UNESCO 2009). Inclusive education policies are, however, only as effective as their implementation. When one examines implementation of inclusive policies in developing and developed countries, it might seem at first that developed countries are on track and are well on their way to success. However it appears that challenges with policy implementation are similar across developing and developed countries (Walton 2015). While the policy-practice gap is a well worn refrain of inclusive education endeavours, it should be noted that policies are the product of complex processes, and often represent conflicting interests. No linear path between policy formulation, publication and implementation can be assumed, and each stage offers possibilities for interpretation and possible contestation. Having said this, many of the chapters in this book have provided

Making Education Inclusive

165

evidence of people seeking to work productively within the aspirations of inclusive education policies in different countries.

Resources The resources needed to make education inclusive are foregrounded by many of the authors of the chapters in this book. Slee (2011, 39) reminds us that resources constitute second order discussions when it comes to inclusive education, with “the recognition of the unequal social relations that produce exclusion” being the point of departure. But for those who are working against the pressures of exclusion to make education inclusive, limited or absent resources severely compromise their efforts. Compounding the effect of inadequate resources is an ongoing battle for ‘hearts and minds’. Moves towards greater inclusivity are thwarted by entrenched beliefs about the limited capacity of certain children and young people, and the assumptions of where and how they should be educated. In the globalised world in which we now live, the aim then would be to have a collaborative approach of consulting with the wider community both locally and internationally. Respecting the expertise of different stakeholders, studying a variety of world-views and understanding the benefits that result from this is the beginning of embracing change.

Way forward In concluding this book, it would be easy to rehearse the many challenges that making education inclusive represents, but this does not always offer much in terms of looking forward. Instead, I wish to focus on a few indicators that emerge from the chapters as priorities for progress.

Human rights and social justice approach Effective implementation of inclusive education, appropriate for each country’s context should be prioritised through continued discussion and debate, as this is a journey and not an event. UNESCO (2009) states that the way forward for inclusive education should be directed towards a rights-based approach, which includes social protection, accessibility (including both physical and social awareness), participatory decision making, capacity building and accountability, which is foundational for a more just and equal society. Quality and equity are central to ensuring inclusive education (UNESCO 2009, 10). There is no tension between equity practice and quality education, and it all begins with a human-rights

166

Conclusion

based approach. Pather (2011, 1114) indicates “if inclusion can be understood as value-based and about community, rights, compassion, belonging, and respect” implementation may be achievable even in the most under-resourced communities. The focus of inclusive education thus needs to shift from being a special needs issue, to being one of social justice and equity. This lifts the inclusive education agenda from being one of finding ways to accommodate certain individual children and young people into the current schooling arrangements, to one that potentially transforms a system plagued with injustices, discrimination and inequalities (Pather 2011, Walton 2011).

Early and sustained intervention High quality education and an equitable start are seen as common challenges for developed and developing countries alike (UNESCO 2009). An early start should combat any exclusion which may begin in the early education years. Inclusive education therefore needs to embrace an early interventions approach so that developmental and preventive measures are implemented in the foundation years. Furthermore, an early start will ensure opportunities for cognitive and language skills, which sustains development throughout life. This means that inclusive education cannot just concern itself with what happens with school-going children and young people, but it must recognise the many ways in which early disadvantage is implicated in subsequent marginalisation and exclusion. In South Africa, for example, Fleisch (2008) reports on the deleterious effects of early childhood malnutrition and hearing loss on subsequent academic performance.

Teacher development Teacher education for inclusive education has been an important focus in making education inclusive. This issue needs to remain foregrounded. I would suggest, however, that we need to advocate for critical appraisals of how we teach ‘inclusive education’ in our pre- and in-service teacher education courses. We do not know enough about if or how these courses, workshops and other teacher developments activities actually result in more inclusive teaching and learning. In addition, novice teachers need to be mentored and presented with best models of inclusive practice for sustained growth and development. Inclusive education should therefore advocate for on-going professional development so that good quality teaching and learning are sustained. Professional development should

Making Education Inclusive

167

include more than content and methodologies, and include supporting and developing inclusive belief systems and mind-sets. Finally, reflective practices should be developed in both teachers and learners so that necessary adjustments can be made to keep teaching and learning current and relevant. Risk assessment should thus be part of the evaluation and monitoring process of inclusive education so that barriers which may arise are not left to become entrenched.

Continued research and advocacy Schools that have embraced inclusive education, or which are in the process of implementing inclusive education should serve as advocates to other educational institutions so that they too can begin the process. Furthermore, schools and other educational institutions should begin in small measures to make inclusion part of their ethos and not wait until they think that all the required criteria for inclusive education are in place. Walton (2011) indicates that South Africa presents a unique case, where some schools—despite having had a history of inequality and systemic discrimination, and only recently having joined the world in inclusive practices—have valuable lessons to share. Such contexts provide a base for research so that models of possible practices can be developed. UNESCO also plays a key role in uniting developed and developing countries as well as collating research which would inform inclusive practices. Advocacy, mentoring and research are fundamental to making inclusive education relevant for all. For inclusive education to become the norm, it should continually be argued for on the grounds of human rights, and supported by appropriate legislation and national policy guidelines. The stakeholders who believe that education is a fundamental right for all children and young people realise that commitment in the face of challenges has the potential to create a shift in policy and in the implementation process. UNESCO (2009) asserts that a co-ordinated action plan would be the ultimate solution, however it is important to note that there is no need to wait for such a plan before education can be made inclusive. While there is still a long way to go, we can also acknowledge that we have come a long way. The way forward requires vigilance to ensure that the gains made are not lost, and that efforts to ensure the identification and dismantling of exclusionary pressures and practices are not relaxed.

168

Conclusion

References Fleisch, B. 2008. Primary education in crisis. Cape Town: Juta. Pather, S. 2011. Evidence on inclusion and support for learners with disabilities in mainstream schools in South Africa: Off the policy radar? International Journal of Inclusive Education,15 (10): 1103–117 Slee, R. 2011. The irregular school. London: Routledge. United nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). 2009. Policy guidelines on inclusive education. http://www.inclusive-educ-in-action.org Accessed May 2014. Walton, E. 2011. Getting inclusion right in South Africa. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46 (4): 240–245. —. 2015. Global concerns and local realities: The “Making education inclusive” conference in Johannesburg. Intervention in School and Clinic, 50(3): 173–177.

CONTRIBUTORS

Vijaya Dharan is currently a senior lecturer in the Institute of Education, Massey University, NZ. Her research interests are in inclusive education, multicultural education, issues related to equity and social justice, E&B difficulties, autism, teacher education and school culture. She currently teaches in both undergraduate and post graduate programmes and supervises masters’ and doctoral students. Anne Fitchett (PhD (Wits), MSc Project and Construction, Management, BArch) is currently a senior lecturer in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of the Witwatersrand, teaching in the fields of Project Management and Environmental Engineering. Her primary research interests are in labour-intensive construction methods, with a particular focus on thin-shell masonry structures. She was on the professional team for the Mapungubwe Interpretation Centre, Limpopo Province and winner of the 2009 World Architectural Festival “building of the year”. She has taught in the School of Architecture for 20 years, predominantly in the field of Architectural History, and was consultant for the Rhodes Ratepayers Association to formulate the conservation policy for the village. Jean Fourie (MEd Educational Psychology) is a registered educational psychologist and lecturer at the University of Johannesburg in the Faculty of Education. She is involved in the training of educational psychologists, school counsellors and teachers. Her research focuses on the implementation of inclusive education. She has presented papers at international and national conferences on supporting learners with special educational needs in both mainstream and special schools. Elizabeth Hooijer (MEd Inclusive Education) works as a learning support specialist in schools where she assists children with learning difficulties and supports their teachers in developing differentiated learning programmes. She facilitates teacher training for the Gauteng Department of Education and lectures at the University of Johannesburg. Her research focuses on multilingualism in inclusive education.

170

Contributors

Veronica Moodley started her professional training as a primary school educator in 1990. She has taught in the foundation phase for a period of six years before joining the Gauteng department of education psychological services. She has been instrumental in offering psychosocial and emotional support to educators, learners and parents. Veronica holds a Masters degree in Educational Psychology and has been a practicing educational psychologist since 2006. She is currently a senior therapist at the Vaal University of Technology. As a PhD candidate at the University of the Witwatersrand, her research interests include behaviour and behaviour support, access to education, wellness and holistic development and support in the areas of psychological, emotional and social living. Sharon Moonsamy (PhD Speech Pathology (Wits), BEd) is a senior lecturer in the Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology at the University of the Witwatersrand. She believes that all individuals can achieve according to their potential, given the opportunity and appropriate instruction. This forms the premise of her teaching philosophy and research areas, specifically in cognition, child language and literacy. Her areas of work are in cross-field disciplines of speech pathology, audiology, education and psychology. Sharon is affiliated to the International Association of Cognitive Education in Southern Africa (IACESA) and the International Association of Cognitive Education and Psychology (IACEP) as well as to the South African Speech-Language and Hearing Association (SASLHA) and the South African Association for Learning and Education Difficulties (SAALED). She is also a member of the education task team and the ethics committee of SASLHA. Jane Mutasa (MPhil Special Needs Education) is a specialist educator of students with disabilities. She has worked for over 40 years in schools, teachers’ colleges and universities as a counsellor and lecturer in Inclusive Education. Currently she is a lecturer at the University of Zimbabwe in the Department of Educational Foundations. Her research interests are disability and inclusive education, aetiology of disability, disability and HIV/AIDS, counselling persons with disabilities and language and communication for persons with hearing impairment. Nancy Ruhode is an Educational Psychologist and part - time lecturer at Women’s University in Africa, Psychology Department. She lectures in undergraduate psychology and supervises student research projects for both qualitative and quantitative research. For eight years she has worked

Making Education Inclusive

171

in special needs education services provision and has researched and published in the area of inclusive education. Recently, she has expanded her horizon into qualitative research with specific focus on access to HIV and sexual health services for young people living with disability for improved health and wellbeing. She works in a team of other qualitative researchers at the Centre for Sexual Health and HIV AIDS Research, Zimbabwe. Sai Väyrynen (PhD Education, MA Education, MA Special Education) has been involved in the development of inclusive education since 1993. She has a teaching career as a primary school teacher and as a special needs education teacher in Finland. Sai has more than a decade of service in international education as an adviser to a number of Ministries of Education in developing countries. She also has experience in the UN system through her work as a programme specialist at UNESCO. Sai has trained teacher educators and teachers, made presentations at international forums, as well as written and edited a number of articles and resource materials. She has worked in several African countries, and countries in transition in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. She has lived and worked in Zimbabwe, France, South Africa and Tanzania, and studied in the UK. In Finland, Sai currently works as a senior lecturer in Special Needs Education at the Faculty of Education, University of Lapland. She also provides regular professional development courses in inclusive education for practicing teachers and pre-primary educators. She has explored the processes of inclusion and exclusion in her doctoral thesis on two different schools in Finland and South Africa, and her research interests are related to the development of inclusive education, ethnography and critical theory. Hamsa Venkat (PhD (KCL)) holds the position of SA Numeracy Chair at Wits and her focus is on a five-year (2011-2015) research and development project in primary mathematics. Her work in South Africa has been in the areas of Mathematical Literacy and Primary Mathematics teaching and learning. The Numeracy Chair work involves research, and the development and trialling of research-based interventions across 10 government primary schools in one Gauteng district. Prior to this, Hamsa was based in London for many years, working initially as a high school mathematics teacher in London comprehensive schools, before moving into teacher education at the Institute of Education and research in mathematics education at King’s College. She is the winner of the 2005 British Educational Research Association dissertation award for making the most significant doctoral contribution to research in education in 2004.

172

Contributors

Elizabeth Walton (DEd Inclusive Education) is a senior lecturer in inclusive education at the Wits School of Education where she teaches undergraduate and post-graduate courses in inclusive education, as well as supervising postgraduate students’ research in aspects of inclusive education. She is a member of the forum of the UNESCO Chair for Teacher Education for Diversity and Development. She has published research on inclusive education in national and international journals and contributed to textbooks for pre-service and in-service teachers. She serves on the editorial board of two international journals. Her current research projects are investigating teacher education for inclusive education in South Africa, and transitions in, through and out of school for learners with disabilities.

INDEX

Adaptive co-management, 131, 134, 135, 136, 137, 143 Annual National Assessment, 29, 31, 39 Apartheid, 16, 17 Aristotle, 23 Assessment alternative, 65 assessment team, 53 concessions, 64 PISA assessment, 41 Attitudes, 150, 151, 152 teachers, 61 Barriers to learning, 44, 48, 54, 61, 62, 64, 65, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72 Behaviour, 94, 95, 96 Behaviour support, 94, 97, 100 Beliefs, 147, 150, 151, 152, 153, 157, 160 Bernstein, B., 14 Bourdieu, P., 14 Bronfenbrenner, U., 98, 99 Class, 14 Classroom assistants, 22 Classroom instruction, 123 Clauses of conditionality, 20 Cognition, 113 Cognitive conflict, 120 education, 115 functions, 116 processes, 121 Coherence, 30, 31, 34, 38, 40 Community based rehabilitation, 147 Community of practice, 81, 83 Comprehensive school, 46 Concrete counting, 29, 30 Connections, 30, 31, 34, 40

disconnections, 30, 31, 34 extreme localisation, 30 Constructivist paradigm, 122 Content knowledge, 28, 30, 34 syntactic knowledge, 30 Continuous professional development, 57 Co-teaching, 50, 51 multi-grade co-teaching, 50 parallel co-teaching, 51 Culture of success, 55 Curriculum curriculum differentiation, 42, 49, 54, 64, 65 flexible curriculum, 48 Disability, 12 categories, 63 causes, 150, 156, 157, 160 medical model, 135 rights, 132 District Based Support Team, 63 Diversity, 2, 31, 32, 43, 44, 45, 47, 48, 54, 56, 68, 69, 72, 76, 84, 87, 164 Ecosystem, 95 Education for All, 12 Educational achievement, 11, 14, 41, 46 Electronic mapping, 140 Epistemological access, 15 Equality, 41 Equity, 41 Ethnography, 44 Exclusion exclusionary practices, 19 exclusionary pressures, 10 silent exclusion, 13 zones of exclusion, 12, 13 Finland, 41, 42, 43, 46, 50, 51

174 Formal education, 46 Foundation Phase, 28, 29, 30, 33, 39 Foundations for Learning, 31, 39 coverage, 32, 33 pacing, 30, 32 sequencing, 30, 32 Full Service School, 61, 63, 71 Genetics, 155 Heterogeneous groups, 45, 50, 54 Home-school partnerships, 52, 109, 150 Human rights, 62, 135, 147, 165, 167 Ideology, 16 Ignorance contract, 17 Impairment, 149, 150, 151, 153, 154, 158, 159, 161, 162 Inclusive education, 2, 10, 23, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 54, 55, 56, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 72, 75, 76, 100, 148, 150, 165, 167 Indigenouscultural beliefs, 152 cultures, 47 knowledge systems, 136 populations, 46 Inequality, 11, 14, 41, 167 Information processing model, 116 Institutions, 14, 16, 56, 137, 167 Integration, 148, 149, 160 Kozulin, A., 35, 39 Language of Learning and Teaching (LOLT), 70 Lapland, 41, 42, 43, 44, 56 Leadership, 55 Mathematical discourse in instruction, 30, 31, 34, 35, 37, 38 domain specific, 36, 37 examples, 31, 33, 34, 38 explanations, 30, 34, 36, 38 generality, 35, 36, 37 mediation, 30, 34, 35, 36, 38 Mediational strategies, 120 Metacognition, 113 Metacognitive awareness, 126

Index Metaphor, 11 Millennium Development Goals, 12 Mobility, 130, 131, 141 Mobility constraints, 136 Multi-channel instructions, 48 Nelson Mandela, 17, 20, 21, 24 Nutrition, 156 PCS-symbols picture communication symbols, 48 Pedagogic content knowledge, 28, 30, 34 Pedagogy for all, 75 Positive Behaviour Support, 94, 96, 98, 103, 109 Poverty, 12, 13 Primary mathematics teacher development, 28, 35, 36 Privilege, 15 Profile of inclusive teachers, 44, 45 Profile of inclusive Teachers, 44 Reflection, 117 Reflective practice, 113, 117, 167 Resources, 30, 34, 35 artefacts, 31, 32, 34, 36, 38 structured resources, 31 Rights-based approach, 143 Robben Island, 20, 22 School culture, 18 School effectiveness, 87 Signage, 140 Slee, R., 2, 10, 13 Social justice, 2, 66 Social learning, 135, 137 Social problems, 54 South African legislation and policy Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS), 32, 63 Education White Paper Six, 61, 96 The Constitution, 132 Special Schools as Resource Centres, 63 Student support, 44, 53, 63 collaboration with families, 52 educational support services, 4, 41, 42, 50, 55

Making Education Inclusive Individual Learning Support Programmes (ILSPs), 64, 66 Learning Support Educators, 64 Levels of support, 63 School Based Support Team, 63 tiered support, 101 Sub-Saharan Africa, 12 Teach against the grain, 21 Teacher beliefs and attitudes, 77 Teacher competencies, 44, 45, 54 Teacher education for inclusion in-service, 61, 65 pre-service, 77 Teacher feedback, 123 Unit counting, 29, 33, 34 United Nations

175

Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities, 62, 148 UNESCO, 12, 42, 62, 68, 96, 118, 120, 147, 148, 164, 166 Universalist orientation, 152 University access, 6 buildings, 133 disability unit, 132, 134, 138 facilities management, 132 initial teacher education, 81, 97 Vygotsky, L., 35, 115 Wheelchair access, 22, 130, 132, 133, 137 user, 22, 132, 136, 138, 139, 142 Zone of proximal development, 29, 121