Search results

New Zealand continues to struggle with interpreting and implementing its current policy of inclusion, especially as it relates to children traditionally known as having “special educational needs”. The purpose of this paper is to trace the discursive development of institutionalised Special Education in New Zealand and examines how the funding and policy mechanisms of neoliberalism within which rights-based inclusion was introduced have complicated the planning and delivery of services in schools.

The paper draws on Gillian Fulcher’s (1989) discourses of disability as they are expressed through policy documents and educational reports to examine the language and values that have underpinned the development of Special Education policy and provision in New Zealand.

The paper has identified and attempted to explain the extent to which traditional forms of exclusion have continued to structure current policy and practice despite a paradigm shift to inclusion. It argues that this has militated against clear understanding, acceptance and success of this major paradigm shift.

In examining the social nature of disability, and its implications in the structures of education today, it is possible to consider opportunities for acting to address these.

The value of this work is in taking an historical approach to help understand why there continues be a distance between policy rhetoric and the reality of its implementation in practice.

This chapter provides a discussion of Roger Slee and Julie Allan’s 2001 article “Excluding the included: A reconsideration of inclusive education” published in International Studies in Sociology of Education. “Excluding the included” is a salient example of the influential work of these two scholars, threads of which can be found throughout their prior and following work, and in the work of other scholars in the area. The importance of the work and its ongoing impact on the field of inclusive education is discussed.

Despite long-standing evidence that the use of exclusionary discipline practices is both ineffective and even potentially harmful, these policies continue to be used in educational settings across the country. In this chapter, we discuss the problems associated with exclusionary discipline, with an emphasis on zero tolerance approaches. We begin our discussion with a brief history of the origin of zero tolerance policies, a presentation of data that contradict the effectiveness of such policies, and examples of the continued and egregious application of this exclusionary approach. We discuss problems of disproportionality associated with the use of zero tolerance policies, including how this approach exacerbates learning problems for students with and at risk for disabilities, especially if that risk is related to emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). We conclude by offering alternatives to a zero tolerance approach in the form of positive and preventative approaches for improving student behavior across various levels of intensity within a tiered system of support framework.

Although special education was built upon the foundation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the discrimination that many racialized students receiving special education services experience cannot be denied. Many culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse students receiving special education services encounter labels that perpetuate racism and ableism and lead to inequitable access to services and resources necessary for more positive postsecondary outcomes. By honoring intersectionality and dismantling the singular identity, educators can become change agents and shift the historic oppressive narrative to create a system of empowerment as these individuals transition from transitional kindergarten to age 21 special education programs (TK-21) schools into adulthood.

This chapter considers the school-to-prison pipeline (STPP) within the United States as a network of flows and feedback loops that connects the education and delinquency systems. This system is heavily biased to funnel students with disabilities, disproportionately from low-income minority families, away from productive educational outcomes through punitive, exclusionary, and restrictive measures that too often result in incarceration. Congress intended special education and disability rights laws to ameliorate injustice and ensure long-term positive outcomes for all students. Through a systems theory perspective, this chapter outlines key leverage points inherent in disability rights laws, which can and should be activated to interrupt and reverse the STPP. Many provisions within the law are overlooked or inadequately enacted within current educational practices. The authors present problem-solving strategies, rooted in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and other disability rights laws, for educators, juvenile justice advocates, and policymakers to use in order to reduce school exclusion and incarceration of vulnerable youth and to provide education opportunity for all students.

The readiness for the full participation of all children in mainstream education varies within schools, from school to school, and across countries with children in mainstream education. Whilst the concept of inclusive education has generated much debate, practice remains questionable and variable around type, place, support and learning and teaching resources. This chapter is concerned with how an inclusive learning environment can be achieved by developing a shared community of practice (Wenger, 2010) for all children. Using lessons learnt from developing a whole-school approach to including disabled learners, I hope to present a rationale for educators to gain a deeper understanding around the need to identify and support all children's learning and participation in school, which presently is often overlooked. Whilst inclusive education is still on the agenda, it is so at the cost of competing initiatives within the educational system which practises a dichotomy between ‘special’ and ‘mainstream’ education. Finally, there will be an attempt to expose the idealised notions of the fundamental principle of ‘schools for all’. Social justice, disability, equity and human rights issues that underpin the social model of disability are being responded to within the ‘special’ education discourse, often creating exclusionary practice and inequalities within education.

This article presents a conceptual synthesis of the international literature on inclusive education while expanding upon, and incorporating, the articles in this special issue. The authors present their 3P model (philosophy, policy and praxis) and relate each paper in this special issue to different aspects of their model.

This article serves as an epilogue to this special issue of the Journal of Educational Administration as well as a discussion of historical and conceptual distinctions between mainstreaming and inclusion while examining global trends in understanding the move toward inclusive education.

The authors examined the detrimental effects of ableism and a medical model of disability and their effects on the educational system. They conducted an analysis based on examining the philosophy, policy and practice of the inclusive movement, specifically by examining conceptual models and inclusive decisions, conceptual frameworks for describing inclusive policy and a focus of the application to educational administration. The authors examined the global movement from segregation/exclusion to integration and then to inclusionary praxis.

The authors maintain that the inclusion literature lacks a sound positivistic empirical base, and so they present throughout the article possible avenues for such research as well as future directions for comparative research.

Understanding the philosophical underpinnings of the inclusive movement is central to developing viable inclusive educational settings. The authors distinguish between inclusive schools and local educational authorities where stakeholders have moved toward an inclusionary system (the minority) versus locales who are reluctant to move systems to actual change.

This article takes a wider view of inclusionary practices, from one focusing on children with disabilities to one focusing on historical and traditional exclusionary practices. By widening the scope of the inclusion discussion, to one of exclusion, the authors present a viably wider lens to educational administration.

All educators will inevitably face unwanted student behavior that they need to address. A ubiquitous response to unwanted behavior is exclusionary discipline practices, including time-out, office discipline referrals, and suspensions. However, extensive research has demonstrated that these practices are associated with negative outcomes, including increased likelihood of further unwanted behavior, decreased achievement, and racial/ethnic discipline disparities. In this chapter, we provide a preventative alternative to exclusionary practices, school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS). SWPBIS is an evidence-based framework for implementing systems to reduce unwanted behavior and increase prosocial behavior, decreasing the need for exclusionary practices.

Concern about the use of zero-tolerance policies for discipline has led to a search for alternatives such as training in early-warning signs of aggressive behavior and strategies for effective classroom management in schools. This chapter examines the effectiveness of the provision of alternatives to out-of-school suspensions (OSS) in reducing the use of exclusionary discipline for minor misbehavior and the school characteristics associated with these provisions.

This analysis uses the 2008 panel from the National School Survey on Crime and Safety to explore this question for approximately 1,000 high schools. The analysis is a probit regression analysis to examine the association between the provision of alternatives to OSS, school characteristics, and the use of OSS for low-level suspensions. This analytic approach provides wide generalizability for the findings, though it does also limit an ability to identify individual school- or student-level effects.

Findings based on probit regression analysis suggest that structural characteristics of schools – beyond student characteristics – are only somewhat related to variation in the use of OSS for low-level infractions and, on average, the availability of alternatives to OSS do not strongly decrease the frequency of OSS for lower-level infractions. These findings are important in the current era of discipline policy scrutiny where schools and policy-makers are searching for alternatives to traditional suspension practices in a limited empirical evidence base.

While these alternatives hold great promise, little is known about their effectiveness in addressing behavior problems and/or reducing OSS. More importantly, even less is known about the characteristics of schools likely to enact alternatives.

This chapter draws on data from an empirical study investigating ethical challenges and dilemmas in inclusive classrooms in order to consider the ways in which such issues may impact the effective implementation and measurement of inclusion. Data from interviews conducted with 12 classroom teachers show that teachers frequently face ethical problems in their practice. Most concerning are those related to the discriminatory behaviors and practices of colleagues. While teachers acknowledge that these behaviors and practices disadvantage students, most elect to compromise their beliefs, professional responsibilities, and ethical principles in order to protect fellow professionals for fear of negative reprisals. Electing loyalty to colleagues over the best interests of students raises questions regarding the measurement of inclusive education. Responses on measurement tools may reflect a desire for teachers to protect colleagues or themselves, providing an inaccurate picture of the situation. On the other hand, honest responses to measurement initiatives may come at the expense of collegial relationships, potentially undermining the very inclusive practices such measurement processes are trying to encourage.