perceptions, possibilities and implementation of inclusive ... · dita nīmante, dr. paed ......
TRANSCRIPT
Dita Nīmante, Dr. paed
University of Latvia
Pedagogical and Psychological Department,
Address: Jūrmalas gatve 74/76, Rīga, LV -1083,
e –mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
Research/ teaching interests: Inclusive education, clasroom management.
Perceptions, possibilities and implementation of inclusive education in
the Latvian context
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of
Vienna, 28-30 September 2009
Annotation
Although the processes taking place in past fifteen years in education in Latvia
overall should be considered as positive, specially concerning the rights of children with
special needs and their possibilities in education system in Latvia into essence in linear
section seem positive and oriented towards development, they are not unambiguous; they
also reveal a certain contradiction. The contradiction is formed between the relatively
politically advanced (by joining diverse international declarations and other international
documents) move towards inclusive common society and education, which is accessible
to all in Latvia, on the one hand, and the practice of general comprehensive school, on
the other hand, where it is still problematic to ensure the educational needs of the children
with special needs, thus also the accessibility of education and implementation of
inclusive education in practice.
The author of the article evaluates critically one of the possible reasons why
inclusive education of special needs children in general education is not being promoted-
the insufficient link between the aims stated in the education policy documents and the
content included in the documents regulating education that results in either actions or
inactivity of those who are implementing education.
Introduction
The recognition of the diversity, the previously existent norms, taking down the
traditions, acknowledgement of the rights of all and everyone and the rights to be like you
are and to live as you consider right is the reality of the post-modern society. This
development stage of the society possesses its uniqueness, which is characterized by
globalization processes, the “shrinking” of time and space, repletion of information,
multiculturalism, feminism and pluralism. At the same time it includes the change of
paradigms of the modernism or “falling out of it” (Skrtic, 1991). As Skrtic maintains,
“postmodernism represents the reconceptualization of the nature of knowledge itself”.
(Skrtic, 1991, p. 18) Besides the ideas of postmodernism express the conviction that “the
society has to provide benevolent conditions so that all individuals regardless their
belonging to a particular group of population could develop full-fledged – even if the
group is small and is not “economically” perspective. (Jermolajeva, 2002, 198). Thus the
issue whether all individuals, especially those who have been historically “outcast” or
“rejected” by the society are ensured the necessary conditions for a wholesome life,
became the topicality of the postmodern society.
Although the processes taking place in past fifteen years in education in Latvia
overall should be considered as positive, specially concerning the rights of children with
special needs and their possibilities in education system in Latvia into essence in linear
section seem positive and oriented towards development, they are not unambiguous; they
also reveal a certain contradiction. The contradiction is formed between the relatively
politically advanced (by joining diverse international declarations and other international
documents) move towards inclusive common society and education, which is accessible
to all in Latvia, on the one hand, and the practice of general comprehensive school, on
the other hand, where it is still problematic to ensure the educational needs of the children
with special needs, thus also the accessibility of education and implementation of
inclusive education in practice.
Research question
Is there any coherence between the understanding of inclusive education, the
defined possibilities of including children with special needs and their implementation in
practice, which has been expressed in statements of 35 pedagogues, education planning
documents, normative documents of education as well as in data obtained in interviews in
5 general comprehensive schools?
Methodology of research
Theoretical methods – analysis of theoretical literature.
The obtained qualitative data were analyzed in AQUAD 6 environment (Program
for analyzing qualitative data, Huber, Universität Tübingen, 1990–2007), using the
primary mathematic statistic methods and in SPSS 16 environment, using non-parametric
statistic methods (test of Kolmagorov-Smirnov, correlation ratio of Spearmen ranking).
Theoretical findings
Winzer the history of special education and development in special education
entitles as humanization of whole society. (Winzer, 1993, XI) Humanization of society in
education is reflected in the concept of inclusive education. Therefore inclusive education
should be looked upon in the context of diverse processes – from isolating to segregative,
from integrating to inclusive, which is historically grounded. They include the
development of perception about children with special needs, the expansion of rights for
children in the context of general education, understanding the “norm” and “non-norm”
of the society as well as the development of society‟s understanding on the whole. The
degree of ensuring everyone‟s possibilities – from isolating to inclusive – should be
perceived as providing broader possibilities for children with special needs to acquire
education as well as for the children themselves to become full-fledged members of the
society.
The inclusive education is based on the values of humanism, it is the reflection of
the social model in practice, represents the ideals of a democratic school, is child-centred,
which supports and concentrates on the educational needs of every pupil in social context
of school, by ensuring the accessibility of education to everyone, the belonging and
participation in all aspects connected with the school life as well as the development and
achievement of every child in effective and qualitative process of education.
The scheme of “Hierarchy of inclusive education” provided by UNESCO
(UNESCO, 2005) becomes very useful, where we can find the visualization of processes
described above. The ladder represented in the scheme symbolizes the way of children
with special needs from isolation to segregation, integration and inclusive education.
Children with special needs have been perceived differently in every footstep; every
developmental footstep solved historically different problems and overall reveals a
complex process of the society development. Hofsaas refers this complex process to
education. He entitles this development (from isolation to segregation, integration and
inclusive education) as four step evolution of inclusive education from anthropological
perspective. (Hofsaas, 2008) He calls those steps: educational exclusion, educational
segregation, educational integration and educational inclusion. Every stage of those
processes in education is characterized by the efforts to solve definite objectives; each
following one is the basis for the development of further processes, for the exchange of
thoughts and for increasing the understanding of children with special needs in the
society, which is followed by concrete actions in education –in the formations of
receiving the education services and in the format of implementing the teaching/learning
process.
Although the theoretical literature offers different interpretation of these issues,
especially about separation of „integration‟ and „inclusive education‟, learning more
about the understanding of this processed expressed by the following authors (Reynolds,
1962; Booth, 1983; Wood, 1984; Harris and Associates, 1989; Ainscow, 1995; Thomas,
Walker, Webb, 1998; Florian, 1998, Thomas, Loxley, 2001; Booth, Ainscow, 2002;
Lindsay, 2003; Swain, Cook, 2005; Gibson, Blandford, 2005; Henley, Ramsey, Algozzine,
2006; Ainscow, 2007; Florian, 2007; Lindsay, 2007) it is possible to summarize several
features which are characteristic to each step of the process as it can be seen in the table.
Table1. Isolation, integration, segregation, inclusive education
Features
Isolation Seclusion, complete separation
Key words: isolation, secluded, outside
Segregation A way how child‟s special needs are being accommodated.
Aim: to ensure education to children with special needs, but when implementing the education
process in a separated environment, when separating children from other by certain features and
concentrating them in one “safe” environment, envisaging “specialized” and “professional”
assistance and care. Medical model in practice.
Format: to establish separate schools, separate classes.
Key words: a child with special needs: visually impaired/blind children, hearing impaired/deaf
children, learners with disturbances in physical development, learners with mental developmental
disturbances, learners with somatic illnesses, learners with language disturbances, learners with
psycho neurological illnesses, learners with delay in psychic development and learning difficulties;
special education – special school, special class, special assistance, special service, to separate, to
unite according to special or particular needs.
Integration Uniting again separate, previously separated parts.
Aim: to ensure the rights of children invalids and to make their life as “normal” as possible in
order to ensure ordinary home and school life as long ass it is possible.
Format: “to place” children with special needs, who for some reasons were isolated and segregated
from the general comprehensive educational institution, into the system of general comprehensive
education. It is based on the opinion that children with special needs have rights to learn in general
comprehensive school. Equality as regards the age.
Key words: a child with special needs: visually impaired/blind children, hearing impaired/deaf
children, learners with disturbances in physical development, learners with mental developmental
disturbances, learners with somatic illnesses, learners with language disturbances, learners with
psycho neurological illnesses, learners with delay in psychic development and learning difficulties;
a child with special needs: problem children, children with troubles, non-standard children,
difficult children; integration by including in general comprehensive school; ensured rights to
learn in general comprehensive school; the school accepts, welcomes, offers, ensures, provides;
possibilities of social integration, second chance education possibilities for children with special
needs; correction programs; integration possibilities; education for children from social risk
groups in a separated environment.
Inclusive education Accommodation of individual needs of every and each child in social and inclusive
environment. The rights of every child to education.
Aim: to change the existing policy of general comprehensive schools (the culture of school,
teaching and learning) by increasing the quality of education, so that the school encouraged the
accessibility to education for all, by ensuring the educational needs of every child, by reducing any
obstacles for any child.
All children are winners as the support and “good, qualitative teaching” is organized for all
children.
Key words: a child, everyone, every child and youth, all children, all; educational institution,
school; the possibilities of everyone to get education; accessible environment for everyone,
accepted; participating, involving, joining; ensuring all the individual needs; achievement, results,
development; for everyone’s progress and development, the suitability of the environment to all;
ensuring development possibilities for everyone; participation of all; accessibility to qualitative
education for all; the rights of everyone; ensuring all kinds of achievement; programs accessible
to everyone; education involving all.
The perception of the above mentioned processes made a theoretical background for
the research
Empirical data processing
The task of data processing was to perform a profound analysis of the inclusion
possibilities of children with special needs in general comprehensive schools of Latvia
and to define the regularities by analyzing the understanding of the inclusive education
that teachers had expresses in their statements, the possibilities that are substantiated in
legislative and normative documents and the implementation as it was revealed in the
data obtained from interviews carried out in 5 general comprehensive schools.
In order to perform the study, texts of their fragments were selected from the
following documents:
a. 35 statements on inclusive education by teachers (hereafter in the text –
statements);
b. interview with the principal of Riga Secondary school Nr. 84 (hereafter in the text
– interviews);
c. interview with the representatives from Smiltene gymnasium administration
(hereafter in the text – interviews);
d. interview with the principal of Šķibe primary school (hereafter in the text –
interviews);
e. interview with the principal of Vaivari primary school (hereafter in the text –
interviews);
f. interview with the principal of Sabile secondary school (hereafter in the text –
interviews);
g. Law on education, 1999 (hereafter in the text – documents);
h. Law on general education, 1999 (hereafter in the text – documents);
i. Conception of development of education for years 2002 – 2005 (hereafter in the
text – documents);
j. Guidelines on the development of education 2007 – 2013 (hereafter in the text –
documents);
k. Regulations on State standards in basic education and subject standards in basic
education, 2006 (hereafter in the text – documents);
l. Model program of special basic education for learners with special needs, 2005
(hereafter in the text – documents);
m. Model program of special education for learners with special needs who are
integrated in general basic education and general secondary education, 2003
(hereafter in the text – documents).
In order to ensure the validity and equity of the qualitative study, the obtained
data were processed and analyzed in the AQUAD 6 (Program for qualitative data
analysis, Huber, Universität Tübingen, 1990–2007 environment with the aim to reveal
the regularities (See Table 2). Data were only partly reduced during data processing.
Texts from interviews and statements were preserved intact, and parts from the texts from
normative documents of education were reduced and only those fragments from the text
that were identified as applicable to the issues under the research were included in
processing. All texts and text fragments were “placed” in AQUAD 6 environment
according to the requirements of the program.
Data processing was organized in two steps
1. Primary coding of data.
Data coding according to its structure is organized in hierarchy including four
meta-codes: isolation, understanding of segregation, integration, inclusive
education that reflects the historical or anthropological understanding of the
development of inclusive education and the development of processes. Meta-
codes include a more detailed system of sub-codes (73 sub- codes), which in its
turn includes the interpretation of 4 levels: understanding, including problems,
possibilities and implementation. (look appendix 1) Coding was performed
according to the developed scheme which was based on theoretical findings, more
precisely, the keywords which indicates the isolation, integration, segregation and
inclusive education. It was done by two researchers in order to reduce the
subjective understanding of the text. Separate parts of the text – the content units-
were coded according to the content during the coding process. (see table 2;3)
Table 2 Card of the cods
Izolācija/
Isolation
Segregācija/
Segregation
Integrācija/ Integration Iekļaujoša izglītība/ Inclusive
education
Izpratne/ understanding
iek_izgl_ spec_i izg_spec_int_izp izg_ip_vis_izp
ikv_iesp_iatt_izp katr_att_apst_izp
katr_iesp_att_izp
ieklau_vide_izp katr_iesp_izg_izp
vis_iesai_i_izp
vis_indva_n_izp
vis_pie_kval_izpr
vis_pie_vienl_izpr
vis_piemer_izp visi_pie_izp
katr_ties_izg_izp
t.sk. problēmas/ problems
izol_pr izg_spec_int_pro izg_spec_pie_pr
izg_spec_sp_izp
izg_spec_atb_nre
izg_spec_int_pro izg_socr_iek_pr
izg_ip_prob
izg_2iesp_prob
visi_pie_pr visi_sas_pr
vis_pie_inti_rne
Iespējas/
possibilities
izg_spec_int_mer
izg_spec_pie_me
izg_spec_sp_ies spec_pie_inti_mer
izg_spec_int_ies
izg_spec_int_ies
izg_spec_int_mer
izg_kor_pr_mer izg_kor_pr_ies
izg_ip_pie_mer
izg_ip_atb_mer
iek_soca_maz_mer
visi_pie_mer
katr_ties_izg_mer katr_iesp_att_mer
katr_iesp_izg_ies
katr_iesp_izg_mer vis_iek_kv_pie_mer
vis_iek_pie_mer
vis_pie_inti_mer
visi_kva_mer
visi_peej_prog-iesp
visi_soc_iek_mer katr_att_mer
Realizācija/
implementation
izg_spec_int_rea
izg_spec_pr_rea
izg_spec_sp_rea kor_pr_sekm_rea
izg_spec_atb_rea
izg_ip_pr_real
soc_int_real
izg_spec_int_rea izg_kor_pr_rea
izg_ip_atb_rea
kor_pr_sekm_rea izg_2iesp_rea
vis_pie_kval_real
vis_pie_inti_rea
vis_kva_real katr_iesp_att_rea
katr_iesp_izg_rea
vis_iek_pie_real vis_iesai_i_rea
vis_iesp_sekm_rea
visi_indvaj_int-real izg_ies_ta_rea
Table 3 Acronym explanation
Izolācija/ Isolation
Izpratne, tai skaitā problēmas/ understanding, problems izol_pr – izolācija, problēmas/ isolation, problems
Segregācija/ Segregation
Izpratne/ understanding iek_izgl_ spec_i – iekļaujoša izglītība kā speciālā izglītība izpratne/ inclusive education as special education, understanding
Tai skaitā problēmas/problems:
izg_spec_int_pro - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrējot, problēma/ education for children with special needs by integrating, problem
izg_spec_pie_pr - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām pieejamības problēma/ education for children with special needs,
accessibility problem izg_spec_sp_izp - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām, speciālā izgl., izpratne/ education for children with special needs,
special education, understanding
izg_spec_atb_nre - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām, atbalsta nerealizācija/ education for children with special needs,
support problems
Iespējas/ possibilities:
izg_spec_int_mer - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrējot, mērķis/ education for children with special needs by integrating, aim
izg_spec_pie_me- izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām, pieejamības mērķis/ education for children with special needs,
accessibility, aim izg_spec_sp_ies - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām, speciālā izgl., mērķis/ education for children with special needs,
special education, aim
spec_pie_inti_mer - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām interešu izglītības pieejamība/ education for children with special needs, accessibility of out of school education.
izg_spec_int_ies - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrācijas iespējas./ education for children with special needs by
integrating, possibilities Realizācija/ implementation:
izg_spec_int_rea - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrācijas realizācija/
education for children with special needs by integrating, implementation. izg_spec_pr_rea - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām sp. programmu realizācija/ education for children with special needs,
implementation of special educational programmes
izg_spec_sp_rea - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām speciālās izgl. realizācija/ education for children with special needs,
implementation
kor_pr_sekm_rea - korekciju programmu sekmīga realizācija/ correction programs, implementation
izg_spec_atb_rea - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām atbalsta realizācija/ education for children with special needs support, implementation
Integrācija/ Integration
Izpratne/ understanding izg_spec_int_izp - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrācijas izpratne/ education for children with special needs,
integration, understanding
izg_ip_vis_izp - izglītība bērniem ar īpašām vajadzībām vispārizglītojošā skolā izpratne/ education for children with exceptional needs in regular school, understanding
Tai skaitā problēmas/ problems
izg_spec_int_pro - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrācijas problēmas/ education for children with special needs by integration, problems
izg_socr_iek_pr - izglītība bērniem no sociālā riska grupām, iekļaušanās problēmas/
education for children with exceptional needs (children at social risk), integration problems izg_ip_prob - izglītība bērniem ar īpašām vajadzībām problēma/ education for children with exceptional needs, problems
izg_2iesp_prob – otrās iespējas izglītības problēmas/ second chance education possibilities, problems Iiespējas/ possibilities:
izg_spec_int_ies - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrācijas iespējas/ education for children with special needs by
integration, possibilities. izg_spec_int_mer - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrācijas mērķis/ education for children with special needs by
integration, aim
izg_kor_pr_mer – izglītība korekcijas programmā mērķis/ education in correction program‟s, aim izg_kor_pr_ies - izglītība korekcijas programmā iespējas/ education in correction program‟s, possibilities
izg_ip_pie_mer – izglītības bērniem ar īpašām vajadzībām pieejamības mērķis/ education for children with exceptional needs, aim
izg_ip_atb_mer – izglītība bērniem ar īpašām vajadzībām atbalsta mērķis/ education for children with exceptional needs, support, aim Realizācija/ implementation:
izg_ip_pr_real – izglītība bērniem ar īpašām vajadzībām programmu realizācija /education for children with exceptional needs,
implementation of programs soc_int_real – sociālās integrācijas realizācija/ implementation of social integration
izg_spec_int_rea - izglītība bērniem ar speciālajām vajadzībām integrācijas realizācija/ education for children with special needs by
integration, implementation izg_kor_pr_rea – izglītība korekcijas programmās realizācija/ correction programs‟, implementation
izg_ip_atb_rea - izglītība bērniem ar īpašām vajadzībām atbalsta realizācija/ education for children with exceptional needs,
implementation of support kor_pr_sekm_rea – korekcijas programmu sekmīga realizācija/ correction programs, implementation
izg_2iesp_rea – otrās izglītības iespēju realizācija/ second chance education implementation
Iekļaujoša izglītība/ inclusive education
Izpratne/ understanding
ikv_iesp_iatt_izp – ikvienam iespējas izaugsmei un attīstībai izpratne/ every one has an opportunity for development and growth,
understanding katr_att_apst_izp - katra attīstības apstākļu nodrošināšanas izpratne/ creation of development condition for everyone, understanding
katr_iesp_att_izp – katra iespēju un attīstības nepieciešamības izpratne/ necessity of opportunities and development for everyone,
understanding ieklau_vide_izp – iekļaujošas vides izpratne/ inclusive environment, understanding
katr_iesp_izg_izp – katra iespējas izglītoties izpratne/ educational possibilities for everyone, understanding
vis_iesai_i_izp – visu iesaistīšanās izglītībā izpratne/ everyone is includes in education, understanding vis_indva_n_izp - visu individuālo vajadzību nodrošināšanas izpratne/ ensuring of individual needs for everyone, understanding
vis_pie_kval_izpr – visu pieejamības kvalitatīvai izglītībai izpratne/ accessibility to education for everyone, understanding
vis_pie_vienl_izpr – visu pieejamības vienlīdzības izpratne/ equality of accessibility to education for everyone, understanding vis_piemer_izp – visu piemērotības izglītībā izpratne/ eligibility of education to everyone, undestanding
visi_pie_izp – visu pieejamības izglītībai izpratne/ accecability of education to everyone, understanding
katr_ties_izg_izp - katra tiesības uz izglītību izpratne / the rights to education for everyone, understanding iek_soca_maz_mer – iekļaušana sociālā riska mazināšanai, mērķis/ inclusion for reducing social risk, aim
tai skaitā problēmas/ problems
visi_pie_pr - visu izglītības pieejamības problēmas/ accessibility of education to everyone, problems visi_sas_pr - visu sasniegumu nodrošināšanas problēmas/ achievement for everybody, problem
vis_pie_inti_rne - visu pieejamības interešu izglītībai nepietiekama realizācija/ accessibility of out of school education to everyone,
problems
iespējas/ possibilities:
visi_pie_mer - visu pieejamība izglītībai mērķis/ accessibility of education for everybody, aim
katr_ties_izg_mer - katra tiesības uz izglītību, mērķis/ everyone right to education, aim katr_iesp_att_mer - katra iespējas attīstīties, mērķis/ possibilities for development for everyone, aim
katr_iesp_izg_ies - katra iespējas izglītoties, iespējas/ possibilities for education for everyone, aim
katr_iesp_izg_mer – katra iespējas izglītoties, mērķis/ education possibilities for everyone, aim vis_iek_kv_pie_mer – visu iekļaušana, kvalitatīva pieejama, mērķis/ everyone included, qualitative and accessible, aim
vis_iek_pie_mer - visu iekļaušana, pieejamība, mērķis/ inclusiveness, accessibility for all, aim
vis_pie_inti_mer - visiem pieejama interešu izglītība, mērķis/ out of school education for everyone, aim visi_kva_mer – visiem kvalitatīva izglītība, mērķis/ qualitative education for everyone, aim
visi_peej_prog-iesp – visiem pieejamas programmas, iespējas/ programs‟ for everyone, possibilities
visi_soc_iek_mer - visiem sociālā iekļaušanās, mērķis/ social inclusion, aim katr_att_mer – katra attīstība, mērķis/ development of everybody, aim
realizācija/ implementation:
vis_pie_kval_real - visiem pieejama kvalitatīva izglītība, realizācija/ accessibility of education for everybody, implementation vis_pie_inti_rea – visiem pieejama interešu izglītība, realizācija/ out of school education for everyone, implementation
vis_kva_real – visiem kvalitatīva izglītība, realizācija/ qualitative education for everyone, implementation
katr_iesp_att_rea – katra iespēju attīstīšana, realizācija/ development of everybody, implementation katr_iesp_izg_rea - katram iespējas izglītoties, realizācija/ possibilities for education for everyone, implementation
vis_iek_pie_real - visiem iekļaujoša pieejama izglītība, realizācija/ inclusiveness, accecabiliy for all, implementation
vis_iesai_i_rea - visus iesaistoša izglītības realizācija/ inclusiveness for all, implementation vis_iesp_sekm_rea – visu iespēju sekmīga realizācija/ education possibilities for everyone, implementation
visi_indvaj_int-real – visu individuālo vajadzību un interešu realizācija/ everyone right to education, implementation
izg_ies_ta_rea - izglītības iespēju tiesību uz attīstību realizācija/ everyone right to education, implementation
Adjustment of code system to the selected texts. Primary coding. Texts were
correlated with codes. The table of codes was defined more precisely.
Determining the mutual connection of the data: frequencies, subordination,
superordination, chain or overlapping, linkages.
2. Secondary coding
Secondary coding was carried out after obtaining the initial results to confirm the
results of primary coding and to expand the interpretation. Thus secondary coding
was performed resulting in coding the meta-codes – understanding, possibilities
and implementation on the basis of developed table of codes.
Determining the mutual relations: frequencies, chains, linkages.
In order to generalize the obtained results, the data were processed in SPSS 16
environment, revealing the correlations.
Main results
Processing data in AQUAD 6 environment, at first the division of frequency was
determined, i.e., the frequencies. Frequencies were determined for each meta-code:
isolation, segregation, integration, inclusive education, as well as in more detail according
to codes. As it is seen from the tables of code frequency, then all meta-codes (isolation,
segregation, integration, inclusive education) can be actually found in the selected
fragments of the text, which represent the understanding of isolation, segregation,
possibilities, implementation, the understanding of integration, possibilities,
implementation, as well as the understanding of inclusive education, possibilities,
implementation. However, there are also some differences. Firstly, one can find all meta-
codes in some text groups (documents, interviews, statements), but in other groups some
codes are not found. Thus, for example, the isolation code was found only in the text
group – documents. Secondly, in some text groups one can observe a pronounced
dominant as regards some meta-code. Thus, for instance, the statements presented the
most pronounced dominant – integration (18) and inclusive education (15). School
interviews revealed the main direction dominant – integrative (23 code units) and
inclusive education (20 code units). When analyzing the numerical frequency of codes in
meta-codes, it was stated that from all 5 general comprehensive schools most codes of
implementing the inclusive education were identified in the interview with the principal
of Riga Secondary school Nr. 84 (11 code units). In comparison with other schools: Šķibe
primary school – 8, Vaivari primary school – 4, Sabile Secondary school - 4 .
This makes us think why implementation of inclusive education is comparatively
more frequently identified in Secondary school Nr. 84. This would need a further more
profound research. However, one hypothesis stems out of these interviews – no
segregatively integrative programs are implemented in this school and the school
regardless the formal and informal difficulties has been able to find solutions not to
license such segregatively integrative programs but has ensured a diverse pedagogical
support to the children at school.
The frequencies we have discovered help to find confirmation to the main
dominant and trend in the education policy and normative documents. The documents
reveal the most pronounced dominant – segregation (50 code units (see table 9) and
integration (72 code units). As it was stated, the ideas of inclusive education are mainly
represented in the education policy documents – all together 21 code unit, in documents
regulating education – only 9 code units. Besides the education policy documents include
both the understanding of inclusive education (9 code units) and foresees the possibilities
(22 code units), yet the documents regulating education do not include the understanding
of inclusive education (0 code units) and the possibilities of the inclusive education are
limited (10 code units) as well as no implementation is foreseen (1 code unit). Look for
illustration in table 4.
Table . 4 Frequencies, meta-codes
A B C D E F G H I J K L M
iek_ies 0 0 6 16 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
iek_izp 0 1 4 5 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
iek_real 8 0 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 11 4 4 0
int_ies 0 0 2 5 4 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 11
int_izp 0 0 0 4 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
int_real 2 3 7 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0
izol_izp 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
spec_ies 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 12
spec_izp 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
spec_real 1 0 5 4 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0
A: /intervSkibe
B: /intSmiltene
C: /izgattkonc
D: /izglattpamtnost
E: /izgllik
F: /iztparieklaujizgl
G: /notvalstsstand
H: /specpamatizglprogr1
I: /specpamatizgprogr
J: /interv84vsk
K: /intervaivari
L: /intSabile
M: /vispizgllik
Thus we may conclude that we have gained confirmation for the historical gradual
development of inclusive education also nowadays where the isolating, segregating,
integrating and inclusive education processes are being revealed. As the example of
Latvia shows, the process of inclusive education is not gradually developing. The above
described process is not linear; it does not ensure also an automatic result in the
development of the society – the implementation of inclusive education in practice as a
result of this process. Therefore the possibilities of children with special needs in
education can be realized simultaneously in different forms.
Some form of acquiring education could be placed at each stage in the scheme. The
possibilities of education system in Latvia for children with special needs are diverse.
Further, having adapted the UNESCO (UNESCO, 2005) scheme and supplementing it
with the forms of acquiring education for children with special needs in Latvian
education system, the following breakdown is offered (See Figure 1).
General comprehensive school, general comprehensive class
Comprehensive school, comprehensive class
Comprehensive school, integrative program in the class Inclusive
education
Comprehensive school, correction classes
Comprehensive school, special classes
Evening school/ Vocational schools
Institutions of social correction Integration
Comprehensive school, correction class
Comprehensive school, special classes
Elitist, specialized schools,
Special schools
Children being ill for a long time at home
Other institutions
Home-teaching, self-education
Segregation
Child at home, street
children „drop-outs”,
children not attending the
school
Isolation
Figure 1. Hierarchy of inclusive education in Latvia
When looking for links among the obtained data, firstly, we construed links
between the different historical understandings. The correlation was found in “Statements
about inclusive education”. The obtained connection was once more confirmed when
construing the link between different understandings and checking the meta-codes. For
illustration see table 5.
Table 5 Linkages, understanding, meta-codes
Preconstructed linkage structure:
iek_izp OR int_izp
AND spe_izp
Distance 1 or 2 -> 3: 5
File: iztparieklizglit.rtf-----------------------------------------
69: spe_izp
· Ir tā, kur sistēma dod iespēju saņemtās
zināšanas un prasmes pielietot dzīves
situācijās. /It’s when the system provides with opportunities received
knowledge and skills to use in real life situations.
· Izglītība, kas nodarbojas ar bērnu
integrācijas procesiem./ Education implementation by integrating children
· Izglītības saturs izstrādāts uz speciālo/
The content of education based upon special education
67- 67: int_izp AND 69- 69:
spe_izp
· Izglītība, kas nodarbojas ar bērnu
integrācijas procesiem/ Education implementation by integrating children
· Izglītības saturs izstrādāts uz speciālo/ The content of education
based upon special education
73- 73: iek_izp
77- 77: iek_izp AND 80- 80:
spe_izp
· Tā ir izglītība pieejama visiem./ Education for everyone
· Integrācija ar mērķi dot izglītību./ Education provided by integration
· Izglītība pielāgota bērnu vajadzībām./ Education adapted to child’s
needs
· Speciālā izglītība, kura dod iespēju/ special education which provide
an opportunity
78- 78: int_izp AND 80- 80:
spe_izp
· Integrācija ar mērķi dot izglītību./ Education provided by integration
· Izglītība pielāgota bērnu vajadzībām./ Education adapted to child’s
needs
· Speciālā izglītība, kura dod iespēju / special education which provide
an opportunity
79- 79: iek_izp AND 80- 80:
spe_izp
· Izglītība pielāgota bērnu vajadzībām./ Education adapted to child’s
needs
· Speciālā izglītība, kura dod iespēju / special education which provide
an opportunity
84- 84: iek_izp
88- 88: iek_izp
90- 90: iek_izp
92- 92: iek_izp
94- 94: iek_izp
5 confirmation(s)
The previously found correlations proved true and they revealed the understanding of
inclusive education in the context of Latvia: inclusive education is accessible to everyone,
it is adjusted to children‟s needs; it gives equal possibilities and its aim is the possibilities
of every person to apply the gained knowledge and skills in the life situations. It is being
implemented in the general educational system in education that ensures the integration
of children and it is based on the education content, which is worked out and oriented
towards the aims of special education. Each parent must have rights to choose the
educational institution for his/her child and the education institution and the society must
be ready to help the child creating a program and conditions appropriate for him/her.
Several other correlations were tested as the result of data analysis. Thus forming
the correlation between the understanding of inclusive education, possibilities and
implementation, another correlation proved true. It confirms that “Reduction of
differences for ensuring accessibility of qualitative general education to all children is
planned and is ensured from Grade 1 to Grade 6 by organizing pedagogical work with
pupils who have learning difficulties providing additional consultation. Thus policy
planning documents include the understanding that inclusive education, which includes in
itself the reduction of differences, the ensurance of quality and the accessibility of general
education, will be implemented in providing pedagogical support for pupils from Grade 1
to 6 giving additional consultations in the study process.
When forming correlations between the understanding of inclusive education and
implementation, another correlation proved true. The correlation confirms that
“Reduction of differences for all children to ensure access to qualitative general
education is planned”. In this case as we see the form on the practical level of
implementation, how “reduction of differences” will be realized in practice is not
disclosed.
Thus we may conclude from these data that the link between the planning
documents of education policy and the documents of regulating education, where the
practical realization of ideas should be reflected, has not been established. The analysis
reveals that the regulating documents ensure only one support form for the pupils who
have “learning difficulties”- it is organized from Grades 1 to 6 as additional
consultations. This leads to a crucial conclusion – the education policy documents include
the understanding about inclusive education and envisage possibilities and
implementation, yet the documents regulating education do not include the understanding
of inclusive education and the possibilities of inclusive education and neither the
implementation is indicated. Thus, as the data processing showed, no further correlations
are found with the school implementation level because schools do not implement the
understanding and possibilities included in the policy planning documents but the
understanding and possibilities included in documents regulating education.
The found correlations indicate indirectly and confirm that special education and
integration is supported in the legislative acts and is implemented in general
comprehensive school.
As it was found in the interviews with the representatives of school administration
from five schools, all schools underwent changes; only it is important to understand –
what kind of changes. The interviews show that changes may be different – both directed
to segregatively integrative process and in then direction of developing inclusive
education. At the same time it was found that formally the documents regulating
education stimulate segregatively integrative solutions but the solutions of inclusive
education are at the disposal of schools themselves or in the “hands of the schools‟, thus
subjective.
Analyzing the data in SPPS 16 environment several correlations were clarified.
Table 6
Correlations between perception of inclusive education, possibilities and
realization, perception of integration , possibilities and realization; perception of
segregation, possibilities and realization and perception of isolation.
iek_ies iek_izp iek_real int_ies int_izp int_real izol_izp spec_ies spec_izp
iek_izp ,280
iek_real ,040 -,103
int_ies ,620* ,057 -,165
int_izp ,185 ,768** -,005 ,065
int_real ,240 ,424 ,473 -,020 ,143
izol_izp ,530 ,471 ,326 ,352 ,613* ,504
spec_ies ,495 -,048 -,029 ,483 -,058 -,010 ,213
spec_izp ,486 ,887** ,094 ,229 ,800
** ,462 ,628
* ,130
spec_real ,514 ,181 ,713** ,169 ,051 ,694
** ,407 ,165 ,413
* Korelācija ticama pie 0.05 (divpusējās)
** Korelācija ticama pie 0.01 (divpusējās)
Table 7
Correlations between perception of inclusive education, possibilities and
realization, perception of integration , possibilities and realization; perception of
segregation, possibilities and realization and perception of isolation.
iek_ies iek_izp iek_real int_ies int_izp int_real izol_izp spec_ies spec_izp
iek_izp ,280
iek_real ,040 -,103
int_ies ,620* ,057 -,165
int_izp ,185 ,768** -,005 ,065
int_real ,240 ,424 ,473 -,020 ,143
izol_izp ,530* ,471 ,326 ,352 ,613
* ,504
*
spec_ies ,495* -,048 -,029 ,483
* -,058 -,010 ,213
spec_izp ,486* ,887
** ,094 ,229 ,800
** ,462 ,628
* ,130
spec_real ,514* ,181 ,713
** ,169 ,051 ,694
** ,407 ,165 ,413
* Korelācija ticama pie 0.05 (vienpusējās)
** Korelācija ticama pie 0.01 (vienpusējās)
It was proved that no correlations were found between the understanding,
possibilities and implementation of inclusive education. However, close correlation
was found between the understanding of inclusive education and the understanding of
integration (rs = 0.768, p < 0.01, close bilateral correlation) as well as between the
understanding of inclusive education and the understanding of special education (rs =
0.887, p < 0.01, close bilateral correlation). It confirms the development of the historical
understanding of inclusive education in the context of Latvia.
On average close correlation was found between the possibilities of inclusive
education and the possibilities of integration (rs = 0.620, p < 0.05, close bilateral
correlation on average); between the possibilities of special education and the
possibilities of inclusive education (rs = 0.495, p < 0.05, close bilateral correlation on
average) as well as a close correlation between the implementation of inclusive education
and the implementation of special education (rs = 0.713, p < 0.01, close bilateral
correlation), which, in its turn, confirms the previously obtained context of understanding
inclusive education in Latvia.
Conclusions and discussion
As it is stated in the report of the European Agency for Development in Special
Needs Education in 2003, “All European countries have already implemented or are
implementing at present the realization of such policy, which promotes inclusive
education.” (European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education, 2003, p. 12)
At the same time the logical question posted by scientists is just rights – why such a
phenomenon is being observed: although states have proponed inclusive education on the
political level, the practice is that it does not take place? Why the development process of
inclusive education is so slow? (Thomas, Walker, Webb, 1998)
There could be two answers.
Firstly,
As the example of education of Latvia shows, the anthropological process of inclusive
education is not historically completed; it is not a linear process; it does not ensure an
automatic result in the development of the society – the implementation of inclusive
education in practice. Thus the possibilities of children with special needs in education
can simultaneously be realized in different forms; thus also the understanding of inclusive
education can be segmented (the understanding about separate parts of the process, for
example, the understanding only about special education) or integrative (unites the
existing knowledge and forms new understanding, for example, about inclusive
education), as the current research proved. The found correlations indicate indirectly and
confirm that special education and integration is supported in the legislative acts and is
implemented in general comprehensive school As the practice indicates the views
whether and which stage of the anthropological process is the best for children with
special needs, and which form is the most appropriate, still are different. Thus we may
assert that the processes develop from isolation to inclusive education, firstly, is not
unambiguous, and secondly, they should be critically evaluated because in any case this
process will have individual social cultural context for each country.
Secondly,
Palmer, Redfern and Smith in their article„The Four P‟s of Policy”(Palmers, Redfern un
Smith, 1994) have precisely indicated that any “policy” whether that is the policy of
school or the education policy has to include all four “Ps”, i.e., Philosophy, Principles,
Procedures and Performances. Philosophy – relevant basic belief, values. Principles –
broad guidelines, include in themselves the planning level where the problems are found
out and responsibilities distributed. Procedures – action to be taken. Performances –
whether the planned actions work effectively. When analyzing the planning documents of
education policy and documents regulating education in Latvia from the point of view of
inclusive education it was revealed that both the understanding of inclusive education and
awareness of the problem are included on the education planning level. Thus the
philosophy of inclusive education is included. However, further analysis indicates that
“principles” and “procedures” are poorly represented in the regulating documents or they
actually are not included in order to ensure that the philosophy of inclusive education
could be implemented in practice. It was proved that no correlations were found between
the understanding, possibilities and implementation of inclusive education. Possibly, that
is one of the answers that substantiate the “slow” development of inclusive education in
Latvia. At the same time it also creates a wide set of contradictions for the future as the
process of preparing normative documents in Latvia is a very slow one, bureaucratic and
intransparent. Although lately there are certain changes when due to persistence of
parents‟ organizations the normative documents are being changed in order to ensure the
necessary “procedures” for the pupils‟ support in the study process. It gives hope that the
situation can change, though gradually.
References
1. Jermolajeva, J. (2002) Kultūra 20. gadsimta otrajā pusē. Gadsimta beigas.
Jermolajeva, J., Jermolajevs, V., Mūrnieks, A. Kultūras vēsture. Rīga : Raka.
190.–206. lpp.
2. Ainscow, M. (1995) Education for all: making it happen. Support for
Learning, 10, 4, p. 55.–147.
3. Ainscow, M (2007) From special education to effective schools for all: a
review of progress so far. In Florian, L. (ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Special
Education. London : SAGE Publication, p. 146–159.
4. Booth, T. (1983) Integrating special education. In Booth, T., Potts, P. (ed.)
Integrating special education. Basil: Blackwell Publishes.
5. Booth, T., Ainscow, M. (2002) Index for inclusion. Bristol : CSIE.
6. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2003) Special
Education across Europe in 2003, Tends in provision in 18 European
countries, Brussels : EADSNE.
7. Florian, L (1998) Inclusive practice: what, why and how. In Florian, L., Rose,
R., Tilstone, C. London (ed.) Promoting Inclusive practices.: Routledge,
p. 13–27.
8. Florian, L. (2007) Reimagining special education In Florian, L. (ed.) The
SAGE Handbook of Special Education. London : SAGE Publication, p. 7–21.
9. Gibson, S., Blandford, S. (2005) Managing Special educational needs, Paul
Chapman Publishing.
10. Harris, L. And Associates (1989) The ICD survey III: A report card on special
education. New York : Louis Harris and Associates.
11. Henley, M., Ramsey, R. S, Algozzine, R. F. (2006) Teaching students with
Mild Disabilities. Pearson Education.
12. Hofsass, T. (2008) Teacher training for special education and inclusive
education – a contradiction? In Ţogla, I. (ed.) Teacher of the 21st century:
Quality Education for Quality Teaching. ATEE Spring University, University
of Latvia. Riga : University of Latvia Press. p. 13–22.
13. Lindsay, G. (2003) Inclusive education: a critical perspectives. In British
Journal of Special Education, 30 (1), p. 3–12.
14. Lindsay, G. (2007) Rights, efficacy and inclusive education. In
Cigman, R. (ed.) Included or Exluded? London: Routledge, p. 15–22.
15. Palmers, C., Redfern, R., Smith, K. (1994) The Four P‟s of Policy In Britissh
Journal of Special Education, Vol. 21, No.1., p. 4-6.
16. Reynolds, M. C. (1962) A framework for considering some issues in special
education. In Exeptional Children, 28, p. 367–370.
17. Skrtic, T. M. (1991, b) Behind Special Education: A Critical Analysis of
Professional Culture and School Organization. Denver : CO, Love.
18. Swain, J., Cook, T. (2005) In the name of inclusion. In Rix, J., Simmons, K.,
Nind, M., Sheehy, K. (ed.) Policy and Power in Inclusive Education London :
Routledge Falmer, p. 59–71.
19. Thomas, Loxley, (2001) Deconstructing special education and constructing
inclusion, Buckingham, Philadelphia : Open University Press.
20. Thomas, G., Walker, D., Webb, J (1998) The making of the Inclusive school.
London : RoutledgeFalmer.
21. UNESCO. (2005) Guidelines for Inclusion: Ensuring Access to Education for
All. Paris : UNESCO.
22. Winzer, M. A. (1993) The history of special education, Washington, D. C. :
Gallaudet University Press.
23. Wood, J. W. (1984) Adapting Instruction for the Mainstream. Charles E.
Merrill Publishing Company, A Bell & Howell Company.
This document was added to the Education-line collection on 14 December 2009