Abstract
Although inclusive education (i.e., education that does not include separate special education classes) is legislated and pervasive worldwide, the implementation of educational inclusion is poor. To create more inclusive school settings, we need to explore what constitutes good practice. Moreover, we need evidence of effective interventions that address student needs. This chapter provides evidence from two interventions aimed at improving inclusion (NDC AI and SKOLKONTAKT®). These mixed methods, which merge quantitative and qualitative data, show that professional development enhances the inclusive skills of teachers and group training of students improves social skills, school attendance, and participation, leading to less loneliness, making the whole school's social environment better. Unexpectedly, the teachers became more aware of social impairments and developed new concrete tools to handle conflicts and bullying.
TopIntroduction
Inclusive education has become internationally pervasive (Norwich, 2013; UN, 1994) and is based on the social model of disability where democracy and human rights are fundamental (Thomas & Loxely, 2001). There is still a discrepancy between policy and practice for inclusive education without clear guidance for professionals (Leifler, Borg, Bölte, 2022b), even in high socio-economic countries.
Inclusive education is complex and difficult to define as it varies according to different historical, geographical, and theoretical contexts (Florian, Black-Hawkins & Rouse, 2017). UNESCO (2015: 101) provides a distinct definition of inclusive education: “Ambitious approaches to inclusion are commonly grounded in a rights-based approach that aims to empower learners, celebrate diversity, and combat discrimination. It suggests that, with adequate support, all children, irrespective of their different needs, should be able to learn together.”
Inclusion in education addresses how school systems deal with inequality and injustice such as fewer opportunities for students with individual needs or disabilities that affect their ability to participate in learning. Nevertheless, a narrow perspective of inclusion that focuses on learner characteristics or disabilities may not shed enough light on the complexity of the learning environment and the reciprocal relationships between children and their environment. Theorists and practitioners of inclusion do not always agree. For example, some see the medical or deficit model as the reason for the increase in students who need special education, including the rise of the influence of the “SEND industry” (i.e., Students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) to serve students with disabilities and learning difficulties (Tomlinson, 2012). If the learning environment is inclusive enough, there is less need for additional support; however, what is generally provided must be grounded in and with a broad competence of what each child in a classroom might need for learning and academic achievement, feelings of belonging and inclusion, as well as well-being and mental health.
There is a gap between ideals and practices where practical experiences of inclusion involve many practical challenges. The common concept a “school for all” used in several countries (Norwich, 2013) is in line with inclusive language, yet conceptual ambiguity without clear guidance for practice of what is really meant can lead to professionals struggling to understand and create educational inclusion. Some frameworks can be used as tools for analysis of inclusion in practice (Florian & Spratt, 2013). Other researchers have developed guidelines such as Index of Inclusion (Booth & Ainscow, 2011) or an instrument for measuring inclusion (Leifler et al., 2022b). Worldwide, schools have yet to determine the best way to enhance inclusion for students with special educational needs and disabilities and their peers. Facilitating the participation of students with SEND–e.g., neurodevelopmental conditions (NDCs)–in regular schools is complex and needs further exploration.
Key Terms in this Chapter
Special Didactics: The art of teaching includes how teaching is designed and prepared to meet classroom diversity. The general didactics are included as well as the “what”, “why”, and “how”. However, in special didactics, the focus is on the “who”–i.e., who are we teaching and their characteristics. It is how learning is available for more students, and the adjustments needed when what works for most people does not work for everybody. Special didactics is grounded in cognition and children’s learning. In special didactics, teachers are more flexible, creative, and have a broad knowledge of what different students might need. This partly aligns with universal design for learning, where the environment and content are carefully prepared and all barriers are analyzed and anticipated. That is, it is not an add-on; it is fundamental in the variation of teaching methods and materials.
RCTs, Random Controlled Trials: Quantitative methods such RCTs are research designs where participants are randomly allocated to an intervention or control group (no intervention). The intervention aims to make a difference, for example, in social skills group training. The same measures are taken at the same time for both the intervention and control groups. In the study presented in this chapter, the control group were active–i.e., they were also doing something although with the same content as the training group. The control group only took part in social activities.
Interventions: Interventions are common in medical settings as a specific strategy to address a problem or specific behavior. It is an act or something you provide to individuals aiming to have effects such as improving or changing a behavior. The intervention provides education in different ways. In educational settings, it can be different strategies for developing academic skills, and it can be professional development for teachers’ learning. That is, such an approach must add something in a certain context with a specific content and measure the outcomes. Measurements are made before and after an intervention.
Learning Environment: The learning environment, sometimes referred to as the learning context, is the whole environment and context that surrounds the students during the school day. It is where all learning happens. It is the physical, psychosocial, and pedagogic/didactical environment. The physical environment includes the rooms, indoor and outdoor, where education activities take place. It is how rooms are organized and includes the acoustics and lighting in the rooms. The learning environment also includes school and class size and the resources that are available. The psychosocial environment is about trust, relationships, and mental health. It is participation, interaction, attitudes, culture, and communication. The pedagogical/didactical environment is the art of teaching, the didactics, and concrete phenomena such as instructions, materials, tasks, and learning activities, also known as artefacts.
Social Skills Group Training: Social skills training is an umbrella term comprising different methods and training for individuals to train and develop social skills. It can be conducted individually or in a group. Some evidence suggests that social skills group training can improve social skills in individuals. Most social skills training is conducted in a clinical setting; however, this study was conducted in the school setting, also known as a naturalistic setting.
Naturalistic Settings: Real-world settings are places where individuals naturally spend their time such as the home, the school, and the playground. Interventions implemented in naturalistic setting have less issues with generalization.
Neurodevelopmental Conditions: Neurodevelopmental conditions, also called neurodevelopmental disorders, highlight the natural variation in populations and puts less focus on disabilities. It is an umbrella term for conditions and diagnoses such as autism, ADHD, intellectual disability, and motor disorders. Dyslexia and dyscalculia are within NDCs. NDCs often have co-morbidities–i.e., these individuals could have more than one diagnosis. NDCs include various conditions that emerge in early childhood and can cause persistent impairments in cognitive, social, academic, or occupational functioning.
Lesson Study: Lesson and learning studies are forms of professional development for teachers, which was developed in Japan and spread worldwide. It includes a cyclic process and starts with a problem or an area for development identified in teachers’ actual practices. It aligns with the bottom-up perspective, and the topic teachers choose aims to improve learning for their students. Students’ learning and progress are measured and evaluated in collaboration. Measuring teachers’ learning, as done in this study (i.e., NDC AI), is less common, however.
Inclusive Special Education: This new focus and concept, presented by Hornby (2015) , combines traditions from special education and inclusive education. According to Hornby, we need to go beyond the tension and dilemmas with the two traditions and start with the core ideas of inclusive education based on human-rights and democracy and create settings where all children can be taught together as far as possible. However, adequate support based on evidence from methods and strategies developed and derived from special education, explicitly for SEND children, is still needed. This integrative approach has been adapted by other researchers such as Ravet (2011) .
IRL vs Digital Training: In real life (IRL) training is a program or training that takes place face-to-face, for example, in a room or a classroom. The digital training is conducted virtually (i.e., on-line) with participants at home or elsewhere. Each training platform has both pros and cons and can affect how individuals respond to the training.