Search results

This chapter discusses the contribution of Sally Tomlinson’s Sociology of Special Education (1998, 2012). Following a brief biographical overview of Sally Tomlinson, the chapter provides an account of the way in which Tomlinson’s work has contributed to demystifying the social reality surrounding special and inclusive education. This is followed by a consideration of some of the outstanding issues and dilemmas connected with Tomlinson’s work. The chapter concludes by looking to the next decade and beyond and the way in which sociology may contribute to understandings of the field of special and inclusive education.

This chapter explores the contribution of the work of Len Barton to the evolving inclusive education discourse; in particular his 1986 article, The Politics of Special Educational Needs. In this article, he discusses the influence of a sociological lens to problematize the current special education policy, practices, and inquiry. The future directions piece at the end of the article called for teacher awareness of the relationship between the personal and political. I felt I was a living, breathing example of the teacher who Len Barton was talking about. I chose this article because of its particular pertinence to my continuing understandings about the phenomenon of special education and subsequently my research with teachers of students with profound and multiple learning difficulties.

This chapter traces the shift of many progressive educators from a general faith in special education to the more recent push for democratic and ethical inclusive education. This chapter examines the critical scholarship that propelled many educators away from systems of special education and into the inclusive education movement. Two phases in the development of inclusive education are described, an initial failed attempt often described by researchers as “integration,” and the current social movement building toward a more genuine social transformation of classrooms and schools.

This chapter discusses the significance of Sally Tomlinson’s article, The Irresistible Rise of Special Education and of her sociological thinking more generally. The paradox highlighted in the Tomlinson’s article, that is, the constantly evolving expansion, globally, of special education, alongside a simultaneous growth in support for the idea of inclusive education, is discussed in this chapter. Tomlinson’s influence on the sociological direction of Julie Allan’s work is traced and exemplified, and the continuing tensions in inclusive education are explored.

This chapter aims to provide a critical analysis of special needs education within the United Kingdom today. Central to such an analysis is an understanding of the rapidly changing social and political milieu within which special needs education is embedded, including the rapidly changing demographics of schooling, and the devolution of political power into four separate but linked countries – England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Following a discussion of such wider social, political and educational issues, the authors explore the convergences and divergences in policy and practice across the four devolved administrations. The authors describe a plethora of contemporary policy developments within each of the four administrations that speak to the need for special needs education to change in response to 21st century concerns about the problems of access to, and equity in, education for all children. Despite this, the authors remain extremely circumspect about the potential of many of these developments to lead to successful inclusive practices and developments on the ground – and explain why. The analysis in the concluding section focuses on the issue of teacher education for inclusion and some very innovate UK research and development projects that have been reported to successfully engage teachers with new paradigm thinking and practice in the field of inclusive special needs education.

The future provision of education for pupils with special educational needs is at the heart of an international debate, and the inclusion of all pupils in mainstream schools (established as a goal in UK legislation) has been the subject of many papers and discussions. In this paper, the authors observe that, despite general acceptance of humanistic arguments, there remains a dearth of research into the efficacy of inclusive practices. In calling for more evaluation, they suggest that the role of special schools for pupils with the most complex learning needs has been overlooked, and that their potential expertise should be harnessed in the move towards inclusion. To make real progress, LEAs and others charged with responsibility for inclusion will need to ensure that the skills developed by teachers in special schools are retained for the benefit of a much larger population ‐ a key challenge in developing a more inclusive education system.

This chapter describes the influences that are fundamental to facilitating a system of support for inclusive education for students with low-incidence disabilities. Some of the major factors are values and beliefs, rights, relationships and a sense of belonging, policy, and effective practices (Smith, 2006; Walther-Thomas, Korinek, McLaughlin, & Williams, 2000). Within each of the features, collaboration is inherent and essential. A summary of literature on each feature is provided with examples to support the importance for students with low-incidence disabilities. The effective practices of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), co-teaching, peer supports, and school-based teams are highlighted. In order to move forward, educators and administrators need to take responsibility for all children. Effective leadership models are characterized by collaborative efforts that foster a shared responsibility of the team, emphasize thoughtful planning, and identify and allocate the necessary resources and supports.

Little research has been conducted regarding the disproportionate representation of minority learners in programs for students with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders (E/BD). To date, the majority of the disproportionality literature examines multiple eligibility categories, most frequently the high incidence disabilities of Mild Intellectual Disabilities, E/BD, and Learning Disabilities. This chapter narrows analytical attention to a single category to add specificity and depth to disproportionality knowledge through a review of the E/BD literature between 2000 and 2010. Of the 16 studies reviewed, we found 11 socio-demographic, quantitative studies that analyzed E/BD special education placement patterns or office discipline referrals for students with E/BD. Two quantitative studies explored ecological conceptualizations of behavioral problems to understand interactions between institutions' special education eligibility processes, and socio-cultural and spatial contexts of schools. Finally, we located three studies that targeted families' perceptions of student behavior, and professionals' biases related to disproportionality. We conclude with reflections about what the current literature suggests as necessary for the next generation of research on this important topic.

The paper seeks to provide personalized learning objects to adults' educators of special groups (AESG) in a technology‐enhanced learning environment.

The paper presents a definition of specific criteria by which personalization of learning objects is effected. An analysis under the scope of adult education and multicultural education is performed, resulting in the development of tools and a clear path leading to more efficient personalization of learning objects of AESG within an e‐learning environment.

Personalization of learning objects for AESG can be achieved to a much greater extent when the element of compatibility between educator and learner defines content, preceding and mapping with presentation factors.

As the research is focused on AESG, the key notion of compatibility may not be applicable to adult educators of the general public.

The paper offers a path through which learning management systems can provide improved personalization of learning objects addressed to AESG.

The introduction of compatibility between educator and learner as the key element of the educator's profile in order to provide personalized learning objects addressed to AESG opens up new territory. The paper is also useful to the developers of learning management systems addressed to any group with special attributes which strongly affect the learner's profile.