Search results

What does special education mean for general education teachers of students with disabilities? In this chapter, we share our approach to advancing values in the classroom placement of special education students in the general education setting. We will take the reader on a journey through time with “Jessie,” a special education student, as we examine the historical exclusion of students with disabilities to their inclusion in general education schools, environments and finally, general education classrooms. In doing so, we will examine the evolution of the general education teacher's role and how the historical perspective impacts current practices. Then, we will elucidate the benefits of inclusion, not only for the special education student but for the nondisabled peers as well. We will recommend values that should be maintained and practices that should be examined. This chapter will conclude with a connection between the values and recommendations of best practices for inclusive instruction.

In academia, assessment is often narrow in its focus on research productivity, its application of a limited number of standardised metrics and its summative approach aimed at selection. This approach, corresponding to an exclusive, subject-oriented concept of talent management, can be thought of as at odds with a broader view of the role of academic institutions as accelerating and improving science and scholarship and its societal impact. In recent years, open science practices as well as research integrity issues have increased awareness of the need for a more inclusive approach to assessment and talent management in academia, broadening assessment to reward the full spectrum of academic activities and, within that spectrum, deepening assessment by critically reflecting on the processes and indicators involved (both qualitative and quantitative). In terms of talent management, this would mean a move from research-focused assessment to assessment including all academic activities (including education, professional performance and leadership), a shift from focus on the individual to a focus on collaboration in teams (recognising contributions of both academic and support staff), increased attention for formative assessment and greater agency for those being evaluated, as well as around the data, tools and platforms used in assessment. Together, this represents a more inclusive, subject-oriented approach to talent management. Implementation of such changes requires involvement from university management, human resource management and academic and support staff at all career levels, and universities would benefit from participation in mutual learning initiatives currently taking shape in various regions of the world.

Higher education institutions (HEIs) in Australia shape the country's economic, social, and political landscape and equip students with the skills they need to succeed in ever-changing work environments. Embedded within Australian HEIs are sets of values that reflect and reinforce collective Australian values, which describe the shared beliefs of the leadership, academic staff, students, and the local community. These shared values then direct all members of the university community. Using a top-tier university in Melbourne, Australia, as a case study, this chapter explores how the values of accessibility, inclusion, and collaboration are embedded into the curriculum, teaching, and assessment practices. Relationship-building and positive student interaction within learning contexts are also crucial to learning contexts in higher education (HE) and are essentially driven by values in HE. Furthermore, values identified in this chapter align with broader Australian values relating to fairness, equity, cooperation, and support. Utilizing the experience and reflection of four contributing academics in HE, this chapter offers ideas and strategies on how these values can be fundamentally rooted within learning and teaching programs, thereby increasing student engagement, interaction, and success. This chapter acknowledges that the needs of contemporary education have changed, as the HE sector now accommodates students from all walks of life. Additionally, a fundamental premise of the discourse is that learner diversity can be accommodated more effectively if it is spurred by values that respect and appreciate learner diversity.

Talent management in higher education institutes is an underexplored topic. Only a small portion of talent management publications is focussed on describing talent management in higher education institutes. In this chapter, we give an overview of the most important topics in the talent management literature in general and link it to what is known about these issues in higher education. It discusses the definition of talent and talent management, the talent management process and the multilevel outcomes of talent management, the fairness and justice issues related to talent management and the importance of embedding the analysis of talent management in its broader organizational and institutional context. In the final part of this introduction chapter, we will explain how the talent management topics are discussed in the subsequent chapters of this book.

Values have long guided special education services and supports for students with extensive support needs; over the past four decades, those values have been backed by research evidence demonstrating the critical nature of values related to inclusive education, self-determination, and seeking strengths and assets. In this chapter, we investigate these values and their supporting research, documenting strengths and needs in extant research. We emphasize the need to continue to embrace and maintain these values while pursuing research that addresses research gaps while centering the priorities, perspectives, and preferences of people with extensive support needs.

In this chapter, we discuss talent development in the context of higher education. After discussing the advantages and disadvantages of inclusive and exclusive approaches to talent development, we present empirical data that detail how the participants of a focus group study perceive talent development in higher education. Our data show the importance of a contextualized reading of talent development as the competitive context in academia hinders an inclusive focus on talent development. This context results in a performance-centred, instead of a development-centred approach to talent management, where outperforming others in narrowly defined areas (e.g. publication record) is the main goal. We show that in such a context the development of competitive talent is rewarded, and the development of communal talent is not. The focus on performance instead of (inclusive) development becomes more pronounced when employees move through their career and is believed to have several negative consequences. Mostly women perceived that such a non-inclusive approach to talent development hinders the development and deployment of their talents and obstructs their career progression.

This chapter explores the principles of community empowerment and active participation in community development, highlighting the importance of inclusive practices for sustainable and equitable outcomes. It draws from diverse strategies and practical examples, showcasing the transformative potential of empowering community members. Through real-world case studies from places like Namibia, Bangladesh, and Brazil, readers gain insights into effective strategies for amplifying marginalized voices and enabling them to shape their destinies. The chapter addresses the challenges and benefits of participatory approaches, helping practitioners tailor strategies to complex community dynamics. It emphasizes the pivotal role of partnerships in strengthening community bonds and fostering collaborations among stakeholders. By embracing empowerment and participation, practitioners, policymakers, and researchers can contribute to a more equitable and sustainable future where communities thrive, and individuals actively shape their paths.