Search results

A shift from a medical model to a social model of including learners with disabilities has occurred over the past 25 years (Stella, Forlin, & Lan, 2007). This shift has impacted both preservice teacher preparation and in-service teacher professional development. This chapter utilizes a conceptual framework built on the work of Forlin and colleagues (Forlin, Loreman, Sharma, & Earle, 2009; Sharma, Forlin, Loreman, & Earle, 2006; Stella et al., 2007) to guide teacher preparation and professional development. This conceptual framework provides a model for (1) addressing attitudes and perceptions; (2) increasing knowledge of disability policies, laws, and evidence-based practices for providing instruction in inclusive settings; (3) and increasing experiences with individuals with disabilities, including experiences within inclusive settings. In addition, the framework incorporates aspects of the context within which inclusion is to occur. Implications include recommendations for teacher training and professional development to improve inclusive education for learners with LID.

Inclusion has gained incremental attention in Lebanon especially since it has been associated with quality education, being the Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4) as declared by the United Nations. Efforts have been made by public and private institutions to ensure that learners with disabilities get inclusive education, and progress has been noted despite several challenges further aggravated by the pandemic and the financial crises. This chapter presents a close examination at the condition of inclusion in Lebanon as it thoroughly studies all elements of inclusion with the assessment of challenges alongside the discussion of feasible solutions.

The chapter is a practise led example of how the inclusive pedagogical approach in action (IPAA) framework lives as evidence of inclusive pedagogy. In particular it draws on understandings of cross-curriculum design as an approach that supports teaching practises for all children. Some readers may be familiar with the language of curriculum differentiation. Commonalties may be seen in the approaches that advocate for curriculum differentiation and cross-curriculum design, however not a lot is gained by adding another language game or rule of curriculum talk which asserts the power of difference by applying the language of differentiation as the focus for inclusive pedagogical action. As the IPAA framework stresses, teachers must believe that they are qualified and capable of teaching all children. Teachers who are engaged in the IPAA in action continually develop creative new ways of working and their professional stance is one where they are willing to work with others (including all of their students) to continually enhance their professional learning through practise orientations. Hence, in this chapter, both the theoretical underpinnings of effective teaching associated with the cross-curriculum design are assumed to have a potential link to any one of the other curricular areas specified in this book. Cross-curriculum design inherently foregrounds inclusive pedagogical possibilities and a concern for knowing more about curriculum theorising and reimaging classroom practice for all students, that is engaging in generative and productive pedagogical work.

COVID-19 pandemic deepens structures of division and inequality in a fractured world. Responses to the pandemic demonstrate that fundamental change to time-honoured social organisation and practices is not only possible, but it is also essential for survival. Social distancing has prompted the discovery that connection is essential for good mental health and wellbeing. This chapter suggests that claims of the success of universal schooling not only warrant the critical scrutiny they have attracted, but there is also the case that reforms remain chimeric for excluded population cohorts. A radical rethinking of the purpose and structure of education is overdue. Pandemic tells us that such rethinking is possible.

Special education today in the Ukraine is dramatically different than its early origins which stressed communal guardianship for persons with disabilities to its current movement to inclusive education. The journey to inclusive education was inconsistent due to a variety of elements such as the collapse of the Russian Monarchy, a series of different governments and social-political structures, World War II and membership in the USSR which stressed a unification of the education system. However, special education professionals who worked at the Special Education Pedagogy Institute of the National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences continued to research and develop a philosophical instructional framework to educate students with disabilities that includes theoretical and practical aspects of inclusive education. This chapter provides a detailed description of this framework as well as prevalence and school placements aspects, classification and assessment parameters, and the impact of legislation for free public education. The chapter concludes with challenges to inclusive education such as attitude modification, infusing necessary teacher instructional strategies, and the incorporation of best practices from special education to regular education settings.

Since the inception of Public Law 94-142, the delivery of services to children with exceptional learning needs (ELNs) has continually changed in an effort to provide optimal programming in least restrictive environments. The roles and responsibilities of teachers have also changed with the most dramatic changes likely seen in the roles of general education teachers, also known as inclusion teachers, serving children with ELNs. Federal mandates require general education teachers be actively involved in the referral and Individualized Education Program process. Once children with ELNs are serviced in inclusion classrooms, collaboration between the inclusion teacher and many professionals becomes an essential part of service delivery. This chapter focuses on elements of successful collaboration for planning, instructional delivery, and assessment, as inclusion teachers apply the principles of Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction. Academic, behavioral, and social needs of children in inclusive environments are also addressed as are essential elements addressing the collaborative roles and responsibilities of general education teachers as they embrace the opportunity to teach in inclusive classrooms.

The essentiality of family involvement in the schooling process is evident from the vast directives embedded within federal mandates, professional standards for teachers and administrators, parent organizations, and advocacy groups. Yet, as explicit as legislative mandates and professional standards are regarding parental rights and involvement, they do not require definitive roles of the family. Several factors influence the lack of a decisive definition regarding the role of the family in the schooling process. Those include the different perspectives on what constitutes a family structurally and functionally, the socio-cultural and political diversity within and among populations, the move to an inclusive education framework, the various terms used to describe parental involvement, the realization that no one family model fits the demographic diversity existing in today’s school districts, and the rights of family members to select their level of involvement. Given the importance of family engagement and student outcomes, three fundamental questions addressed in this chapter are, “How can inclusive schools enhance productive collaborative family engagement networks?” “How can the family be empowered to voluntarily participate within those networks?” and “How can inclusive schools connect with teacher preparation programs to promote the competency of educators for those collaborative family/school engagement networks?” In this chapter we delineate an interactive triad conceptual model with the school as the “connecting agent” to build relationships with families and teacher preparation, setting the stage for productive family engagement as partners in inclusive settings.

The aim of this case study is to describe what commitment and actions are needed in the Swedish school so that principals — within the Swedish school policy framework and with the goal of creating an inclusive school culture and practice — can positively affect schooling for students with disabilities, with a particular focus on students with autism spectrum conditions (ASC). Three research questions guide the study: (1) What commitment and actions do principals consider important for developing an inclusive school for all students, with a particular focus on students with ASC? (2) How do the principals reflect on their own leadership in the development of inclusive education, with a particular focus on students with ASC? (3) Based on the results, what are the implications of the study in practice?

As part of a three-step data collection method, a snowball sampling was conducted in which n = 6 principals were initially interviewed and the data analyzed by an inductive thematic content analysis.

(1) Certain structures are needed when planning how to develop mutual values when organizing an inclusive school involving students with ASC, (2) the principals could, at times, feel a sense of loneliness in relation to their superiors and decision-makers and (3) more accountability from educators and greater consideration for the student perspective in decision-making are needed.

It was found that (1) certain structures are needed when planning how to develop mutual values when organizing an inclusive school involving students with ASC, (2) the principals could, at times, feel a sense of isolation in relation to their superiors and decision-makers and (3) more accountability from educators and greater consideration for the student perspective in decision-making are needed.

Index for inclusion and elements from the inclusive leadership model were used in the data collection and analysis.