Inclusive and Adaptive Teaching

Meeting the Challenge of Diversity in the Classroom

Peter Westwood

• Verlag: Routledge
• Jahr: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351061247
• Auflage: 2
• Thema: Éducation
• Thema: Éducation générale

From bestselling author Peter Westwood, this new edition of Inclusive and Adaptive Teaching provides a considered approach to meeting the ongoing challenge of inclusive teaching in the classroom and offers a range of strategies for good practice.

This comprehensive resource promotes a fully inclusive approach to teaching and outlines the necessary adaptations and accommodations that are often required in order to address the needs of the very diverse population of students now to be found in most classrooms. Drawing on the ever-evolving practices of inclusive education and research into learning theories, Westwood describes useful, evidence-based strategies for adapting curriculum content, learning activities, assessment and resource materials.

Fully updated to reflect cutting-edge international research and teaching practices, this new edition gives additional focus to the role of digital technology, differentiation, the teaching of STEM subjects and support for inclusivity in higher education.

Accessible chapters in this new edition present:

• 
  
  

• principles, aims and issues in providing inclusive schooling;

• 
  
  

• sound pedagogical practices for adapting curriculum content;

• 
  
  

• evidence-based methods for teaching mixed-ability classes;

• 
  
  

• ideas for designing and modifying teaching materials;

• 
  
  

• ways of implementing inclusive assessment of learning.

Each chapter contains an up-to-date list of online and print resources easily available to teachers who wish to pursue topics in greater depth. This is an invaluable resource for both practising and trainee teachers and teaching assistants, as well as school principals, school counsellors and educational psychologists.

---

Chapter 1
Inclusion defined, described and dissected

---

Almost all education systems in developed countries around the world are now committed to enacting a policy of inclusion – meaning that their schools are expected to meet the learning needs of students across a very wide range of abilities from giftedness to intellectual impairment. These students also come from different family and socio-economic backgrounds, have different life experiences, different cultural origins, different academic skill levels, and in many cases a different first language. Authentic inclusive education is regarded as something to which all schools should aspire in order to accommodate the diversity that always exists within the student population (Thompson & Timmons, 2017). It is argued here that the only way to cater for diversity among students and facilitate real inclusion in the classroom is to adapt – when necessary – the approach to teaching a core curriculum.

Defining inclusion and inclusive education

Inclusion has been conceptualized in many different ways. At the ideological level, an inclusive education system is really a subset of an inclusive society – a society in which diversity among its people is acknowledged, accepted and valued, and in which individuals and minority groups are not marginalized. According to UNESCO (2011, p. 1), ‘The ultimate goal of inclusive quality education is to end all forms of discrimination and foster social cohesion’. Similarly, UNICEF (2017) views effective inclusion as central to the development of a more inclusive society. This is in keeping with the comment by Perles (2012, p. 1) that:

[S]tudents who are taught in an inclusion setting are more likely to build a society that is accepting of differences and able to respect people from diverse backgrounds. Supporting inclusive classrooms may be the first step towards creating a more diverse workforce and world.

At a pragmatic level, the very noble concept of a fully inclusive society, as described above, has tended to lose some of its impact when it comes to implementation in schools. In reality, a much narrower interpretation has become widely accepted in the field of education, namely that inclusive education is a classroom model where students with special needs are taught in classrooms alongside their general education peers (Teach.com, 2017).

In Australia, a state government report into the education of students with disability or special needs attempted to include both the noble and the pragmatic aspects when it defined inclusion in these terms:

Inclusive education refers to the philosophy of embracing human diversity and valuing and supporting the full participation of all students as equal members of an educational community. In effect, students with disabilities and special needs should not only be enrolled in a mainstream setting, but that education environments and teaching strategies should be designed to include and benefit all students.

(NSW Legislative Council, 2017, p. 14)

It has never been envisaged that inclusion in schools could be achieved without additional support being provided for some learners. Most recently, the additional teaching that may be needed by these students is being implemented through the Response-to-Intervention Model (Jones & Ball, 2012; Mitchell, 2015). Under this model, all students in a mixed-ability class receive effective high-quality instruction at Tier 1, and those who then need additional support receive it at Tier 2 through small group intervention, or at Tier 3 which involves daily individual intensive remediation. Access to outside specialist services may also be required for a few students (e.g. speech therapy; psychology service).

Full inclusion: Is it feasible?

Full inclusion is a policy under which any student with a disability, regardless of the nature or the severity of the disability, should receive his or her education within a regular education classroom in their neighbourhood school (LDAA, 2017). The emphasis is on the child being placed in a regular class, with additional support and special services then provided as necessary to the school. This is seen as the ideal model for creating authentic inclusion (Warren, Martinez & Sortino, 2016). However, according to Kauffman and Badar (2017, p. 55), ‘The idea that all students, including those with disabilities, can and should be taught together in the same class and school is a highly prized myth.’ They argue that we should be more concerned about providing appropriate and effective instruction rather than about where a student is taught. In an earlier text, Kauffman and Hallahan (2005) used the title The illusion of full inclusion in reference to providing for the most disabled students. Arguments have even been put forward that placing a student in a classroom where his or her needs are not being adequately met almost amounts to a form of abuse (MacBeath et al., 2006).

In contrast to those who call for full inclusion, with all students placed in the mainstream, some advocates for inclusive education still see an inclusive school as one of several possible placement options available to students with special needs and disabilities within a continuum of placements and services (e.g., Hatlen, 2017; Kauffman & Badar, 2017). These options range from full-time inclusion in mainstream classes, part-time inclusion, placement in a special class, attendance at a special school, or home tutoring. This range of options makes it possible to place a student with special educational needs in the most appropriate and least restrictive setting. Hatlen (2017) uses the term ‘responsible inclusion’ to highlight the importance of matching a student to an educational environment that can really provide the necessary curriculum and support. This seems to be the position adopted by most developed countries; and few if any have attempted full inclusion and the abolition of special schools. A study conducted by the National Council for Special Education in Ireland (NCSE, 2013) involved the collection of data from ten countries, including Canada, Italy, Australia, Scotland, Norway and Japan. The main finding was that:

[A] traditional model of a continuum of special educational provision was evident in every country. Factors that varied included the number of types of settings, the number and types of categories of impairment, the number of children identified within each category.

However, the Centre for the Study of Inclusive Education, an influential charitable organization in the UK, still argues in its Strategy for 2016 to 2019 for ‘one school for all children’ (CSIE, 2016); and this remains the aim of the more extreme advocates for inclusion who would like to see all special schools abolished. This is despite evidence that from early childhood education through to higher education, teachers are still inadequately trained for inclusive teaching in the mainstream, and are often inadequately supported (Kemp, 2016).

Potential benefits of inclusion

It is hoped that the responsible inclusion of students with special needs in mainstream classrooms will have some of the following benefits for children with disabilities or special needs:

• increased opportunity for social interactions and the forming of friendships;

• greater development of communication skills;

• increased independence in all areas of functioning;

• enhanced self-esteem and self-efficacy;

• peers providing good models of appropriate behaviour and social skills;

• access to the same mainstream curriculum;

• exposure to higher standards of academic achievement;

• higher expectations for social behaviour and schoolwork;

• better preparation for adult life in an inclusive society.

Benefits that should accrue for other students and the general population include the following:

• enhanced appreciation of individual differences;

• recognition, understanding, respect and acceptance of diversity;

• increased awareness of what students with disabilities can achieve and contribute;

• opportunity to develop ‘helping skills’ (e.g. peer assistance) and positive attitudes;

• all students benefit when extra or modified resources are provided and when adaptive teaching is used.

Benefits to a school from moving towards an inclusive culture include the following:

• greater collaboration among school staff, teamwork and sharing of expertise;

• special education staff working more closely with classroom teachers;

• increased use of evidence-based methods of teaching and assessment;

• differentiation of curriculum content and the path to learning when necessary;

• more effective use made of material and human resources;

• greater access to outside services;

• increased communication with parents and greater parent participation;

• that the needs of all students are met more successfully.

Studies have tended to show that most of the benefits listed above do indeed occur in successful inclusive schools; but truly inclusive education is not easy to provide, and it remains an ideal that many schools are yet to achieve (Armstrong, Armstrong & Spandagou, 2011; Negrón-Gonzales, 2017; NSW Legislative Council, 2017). Implementing inclusion still remains a work in progress, even after almost 30 years of experimentation by trial and error.

So is inclusion effective?

As with most grand ideas that are driven ‘top down’ by moral and human rights imperatives and underpinned by good intentions, it is important to ask if inclusion is really working in practice in all schools. Are teachers in mainstream classes really able to meet the social, emotional and academic needs of all students, regardless of their backgrounds, gender, ability, disability and level of motivation? Are teachers really able to modify their approach and teach adaptively?

In a review of more than 280 research studies conducted in 25 countries, Hehir et al. (2016) found consistent evidence that inclusive educational settings can confer substantial short- and long-term benefits for disabled children’s cognitive and social development; and being educated along-side a student with a disability does not lead to negative consequences for non-disabled students. They conclude that: ‘research on effective inclusive schools indicates that inclusion can have important positive benefits for all students’ (p. 26). An earlier review by ERIC Clearing House for Disabilities and Gifted Education (2003) concluded that students with disabilities in inclusive settings have usually shown improvement in test results, acquired social and communication skills previously underdeveloped, shown increased interaction with peers, achieved more of the goals set in their individual education plans, and are better prepared for life beyond school. Importantly, a large-scale study in The Netherlands discovered no significant differences in attainment between students without difficulties (typical students) taught in inclusive classrooms and those taught in traditional classes (Ruijs, Van der Veen & Peetsma, 2010). The ...