The Adoption of Inclusion Reform - Report Example

Inclusion Reform Name Institution Table of Contents Table of Contents ii Introduction 1 1. Instructional Strategies 2 2. Resources 3 3. Psychological Behavior and Emotional 4 4. Community 5 5. Certification and Training 6 Creating Change in Inclusion Reform 6 Four Dilemmas of Change 8 Conclusion 9 References 10 Introduction The adoption of inclusion reform requires a change in school culture. The first-order of change involves improving the efficiency of current procedures and processes (Evans, 1996). This change may be isolated or incremental, and may not cause a significant difference in the school. The inclusion education system acts on this first-order change. The second-order of change is systematic and involves modifying organizational structures, norms and processes (Evans, 1996). This change has a significant difference in a school because it requires people to change their behaviors, perceptions and beliefs towards inclusion of children with disabilities in the public classroom. The inclusion reform has influenced first-order and second-order changes to current education procedures, processes, organizational processes and organizational norms. Changes from the inclusion reform have caused certain challenges and pressures on the inputs and processes of the education system globally. Changes in education system inputs include access to financial resources, training for teaching staff, curriculum changes, infrastructure for disabled students, resource centers, access to specialist consultants and policy changes. For instance, policies may have to be localized to respond to the inclusion educational agenda and teachers have to be prepared to adopt inclusive education practices (Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth [ARACY], 2013). Process changes include introduction of new practices in classrooms and schools, changes in instructional practices and new distribution systems for funding inclusion in school jurisdictions. These input and process changes suggest a strategic systematic change where planning of reforms is pragmatic and implementation of the reforms is bottom-up and top-down. 1. Instructional Strategies Different countries have adopted different approaches for integrating inclusion in teaching instruction. In Alberta, the Canadian government adopted the Standards on Special Education policy document to address inclusion. According to the ARACY (2013), the goal of Canada’s inclusive system is to provide students with suitable learning opportunities and environments to help them achieve their goals and potential. The policy document addresses segregated education by acknowledging that children with special needs need to be in class with peers and receive modified instruction based on the Alberta Programs of Study. The instructional changes are guided by the results of disability tests to help teachers understand the level of disability and education needs for each child with learning disability. Instructors are expected to code each student with disability and inform their school districts of the coding level of their students. This information helps the Canadian government to distribute funds based on the coding of each school and jurisdiction (ARACY, 2013). Australia has also implemented an inclusive education reform at the state level. The State government has been responsible for implementing the Program for Students with Disability. This policy is similar to Canada’s inclusive reform policy. The Victoria State government, for instance, has adopted the reform through the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development and remained committed to delivering inclusive education system for all students. This commitment is guided by the federal Disability Discrimination Act of 1992. The Victorian government does not necessarily support the inclusion of children with disabilities in neighborhood schools. Rather, the government’s inclusive policy document requires schools to categorize their students in seven categories based on their disability such as hearing impairment, intellectual disability, physical disability and visual impairment. Once the categories are identified, Australian teachers are required to develop different modes of instruction to meet different needs. When children follow the same program of study, the curriculum for children with disabilities is modified and adapted in response to their learning needs. This curriculum change helps children with disabilities to engage in classroom learning and participate in events or instruction. 2. Resources Resources for inclusion are provided by state governments and distributed to provision and municipal levels. In Canada, the provincial government is responsible for providing block funding to the school jurisdictions. The allocation of this funding depends on the coding of students in each school and the population of students with disabilities in a school district. The provincial government also provides support for inclusive education, home schooling and special classes in local schools within every school district. This support is available to the school district and to individual schools (ARACY, 2013). In Australia, the state government runs the Program for Students program to provide funding for government schools in each state. This program allows government schools to access resources for students with moderate to severe learning disabilities. The Victorian government, for instance, receives the resources directly to schools and supervises the selection of students with disability in schools. The state government also provides resources such as consultants and teachers to help implement inclusive education. In addition to teaching resource, Victorian government also provides material resources based on the severity of the child’s disability and class size (ARACY, 2013). Similar provisions are made by the New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland governments. The Queensland government provides resources for post-school services for students with disabilities. Once the students complete their Year 10, they participate in the Senior Education and Training (SET) program that provides different schooling options for the children including individualizes learning and teaching assistants (Bourke, 2010). Access and adequacy of resources (such as Braille equipment) is a key consideration for teachers in Bangladesh and the US (Malak, 2013). 3. Psychological Behavior and Emotional Teachers in most countries showed similar barriers and psycho-emotional challenges in implementing the inclusion reform. The challenges for teachers in Australia include lack of time to modify their instruction strategies and adapt the curriculum to the students’ needs, inability to individualize learning, lack of support from the school, negative perceptions towards adjustments for students with disabilities, inadequate resources and cultural differences due to the diversity of Australia. These barriers have caused emotional difficulties for teachers because they are unable to compromise their teaching strategies or protect their students from failure (ARACY, 2013). In the United Kingdom, there was a lot of doubt from politicians, parents, teachers and special education consultants. The doubts were based on the perceived risk of failure of integrating students with disabilities and special education needs in the mainstream schools. These doubts caused confusion, guilt and frustration among the stakeholders (Bourke, 2010). The United Kingdom recognizes that children with disabilities encounter discriminatory attitudes from nondisabled children in regular schools and adults. The United States inclusion reform requires that regular schools should combat these discriminatory attitudes to prevent alienation of children with disabilities (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2009). In addition, the UK government encourages regular schools to create welcoming school communities and to respect the rights of all children while providing resources to ensure effective education for all children (Wertheimer, 1997). The UK further developed certain principles to avert psychological and emotional dilemmas of educating children with disability. These principles address issues such as acceptance of children’s diversity in schools, listening to all schools and the provision of education services to all children regardless of their physical, social or psychological characteristics (Wertheimer, 1997). 4. Community Community involvement is encouraged in inclusion policies. The Canadian, UK, United States and Australian governments encourage the cooperation and the involvement of parents in the inclusive education reform. Parents are encouraged because their active participation in the child’s education is very important (ARACY, 2013). In addition, parental involvement is very critical in the design of individual education plans for their children. Collaboration between school staff and parents is also encouraged by the Australian government where each stakeholder is expected to fulfill a particular role in the inclusion reform (ARACY, 2013). In Australia, various provinces have adopted a post-school support program for children with disability. For instance, New South Wales (NSW) Education Department developed a transition plan to connect students with disabilities and parents with post-school services. However, the challenge for NSW is increasing access to these services for local governments and providing adequate vocational training programs at local institutions. 5. Certification and Training Teacher training and professional development is recognized as an international good practice for inclusion education (ARACY, 2013). Adequate training is important because it influences the attitudes of teachers and other staff towards children with disabilities in their schools and classrooms. Australian teachers are encouraged to engage in training programs so that they can adapt their teaching practices to the needs of students with disabilities. The teachers need to be highly-skilled while school principals need to demonstrate effective leadership to ensure that the inclusive education program is a success. The Australian government supports teacher training by providing adequate teacher education on inclusion and providing trained teaching assistants to facilitate inclusion in the classroom (ARACY, 2013). Teachers in the UK have also reported the need for training because they feel under-qualified and are frustrated by the inclusion reforms. The government provides this training and is responsible for reducing the complex managerial responsibilities that affect the teachers’ motivation and ability to teach students with disabilities. Creating Change in Inclusion Reform Creating change in inclusion reform has been a challenge. This challenge has mainly been in the implementation, human side and psychological aspect. On implementation, some countries have adopted inclusion reforms without any consistency in their approaches. For instance, each Australian state has adopted different approaches for screening and reporting students with disability. These different approaches suggest that the adoption of the inclusion reform policy has been inconsistent across territories and states in Australia. The lack of consistency makes it difficult to establish the progress of students with disabilities based on their learning outcomes and achievements. Another implementation challenge in Australia is the under-representation of students with disability at state and national level due to lack of standardized accountability and screening measures. Lack of standardized measures means that students with disability are not adequately assessed to help the state government modify or improve its plans for inclusion education outcomes (Bourke, 2010). The human side of change in school is concerned with resistance, reform and real-life issues associated with innovation (Evans, 1996). Resistance causes a sense of loss among teachers who may be fearful of the impact of the reform on their workload. It is important that school leaders address resistance from teachers rather than avoid conflict or discord. Authentic school leaders can encourage the teachers’ freedoms while still adhering to the values of the inclusion reform (Evans, 1996). They also need to listen to the complaints from the resistors because the complaints are valid and require attention. The restructuring of classrooms and instruction strategies may be a valid complaint from resistors. For instance, the modification of instructional strategies has been a problem in Bangladesh because most teachers feel that their current workload is high, complex and bureaucratic (Malak, 2013). Due to the perceived high workload, many teachers have requested that education departments provide teaching assistants to help them attend to the needs of students with disability. School leaders have resolved this resistance in Australian by providing personnel (such as teaching assistants) and training opportunities for teacher aides to improve their qualifications and skills in teaching students with disabilities (Bourke, 2010). Four Dilemmas of Change The psychological nature of change is concerned with loss, incompetence, conflict and confusion (Evans, 1996). Loss in inclusion education reforms is characterized by disruption of the teachers’ instructional strategies while teachers have expressed their feelings of incompetence with students with disability. Teachers have also expressed their confusion with policy changes in the adoption of inclusion and the conflicting roles and responsibilities that they have to perform despite their work overload. The changes in teaching and leadership practice, routines and practices have also contributed to the confusion and conflict among teachers as they feel inadequate in dealing with children with disabilities (Evans, 1996). The shift from loss to commitment can be achieved by making the reform more meaningful and considering factors such as time, continuity of education and personal contact with the affected teachers (Evans, 1996). The shift in incompetence to feeling competent can be achieved by developing the teachers’ skills through continuous, personal and coherent training (Evans, 1996). Similarly, confusion could be resolved by realigning organizational structures and roles so that individual decision-making and responsibilities are clear to all stakeholders. Lastly, school leaders can resolve conflict by generating support for inclusion reform through pressure and use of power (Evans, 1996) Overall, school leaders need to confrontation is necessary in reducing the four dilemmas. Confrontation requires that school leaders reduce the friction and the challenges of inclusion reforms as well as overlook aspects of the reform that do not cause emotional problems to teachers, parents, students and the school leadership. The decision to confront the challenges with inclusion reform depends on innovation, the population of teaching staff that support the inclusion reform, the population of teaching staff that does not support the inclusion reform, the credibility of school leadership, accessibility of resources and the provision of support from government and other stakeholders (Edumel, 2015). School leaders are cautioned to avoid compromising their integrity because it would make them look weak to their followers and affect their ability to gain consensus from the school community when communicating their shared commitment for inclusion values. Other proactive steps for successful change due to inclusion reforms are recognizing that the reforms are an external threat, providing training to help teachers and school leaders to transition into inclusion classrooms; introducing role models; emphasizing safety and adopting transition rituals at different stages of change implementation (Evans, 1996). Conclusion The inclusion reform has brought about change in the public school system. This change has affected the allocation of resources, the psychological and emotional behavior of stakeholders, the content of instructional strategies, community participation, and the certification and training requirements. School leaders need to understand their role in the reform and to develop a change plan outlining the processes for restructuring their schools. References Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY). (2013). Inclusive education for students with disability: A review of the best evidence in relation to theory and practice. Australia: ARACY. Bourke, P. E. (2010). Inclusion education reform in Queensland: Implications for policy and practice. The International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(2), 183-193. Evans, R. (1996). The human side of school change: Reform, resistance and the real-life problems of innovation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Malak, S. (2013). Inclusive education reform in Bangladesh: Pre-service teachers’ responses to include students with special education needs in regular classrooms. International Journal of Instruction, 6(1), 195-214. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2009). Policy guidelines on inclusion in education. Paris, France: UNESCO. Wertheimer, A. (1997). Inclusive education: A framework for change. National and international perspectives. Bristol, UK: Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education. Read More