Inclusive but
independent: making
inclusive schooling work
in the current educational
context
Prof Bob Conway
School of Education, Flinders University
bob.conway@flinders.edu.au
The key concepts
Rights of those with special
needs to be involved in
meaningful ways
ACCESS
Curriculum
PARTICIPATION
Content
Relevant
Teaching/learning
Student
Engagement
Broad
activities
Active learning
Qualification
outcomes
© R Conway, 2012
What’s in a term/concept?
Integration of students
with special needs
Inclusion by proximity
Inclusion of students
with special needs
Inclusive Schools
Inclusive Education
Education for all
Inclusive society??
© R Conway, 2012
© R Conway, 2012
© R Conway, 2012
© R Conway, 2012
© R Conway, 2012
What is the Australian literature
base?






Attitudes and beliefs of staff and leaders are well
researched
Specific policies and practices in jurisdictions
Inclusive practices (or not) in ECE, Prim & Sec
Inclusion needs of students with specific special
needs and how best to meet them
Pre- and inservice training needs of staff
Models of service delivery based on funding,
philosophy and pragmatics
© R Conway, 2012
What is the Australian data?
•
Identified numbers are rising
•
•
•
4% to 12% depending on disability categories used
Some use “diagnosed”, others “deemed”
Increasing enrolments in special education settings in some
states/territories
•
•
•
•
(Dempsey, 2011)
High variations in reported incidence
•
•
2.6% (1996) – 3.5% (2001) – 4.8% (2009)
Political commitment
Voting against secondary mainstream placements by students
and parents
Special needs specific (eg. social-emotional)
Enrolments in government schools are increasing as a
percentage of total enrolments (Except WA) – does
government school mean the default option for students with
special needs?
© R Conway, 2012
What’s the national agenda?

NDIS
 DEEWR activities around disability



Gonski Review issues and disability
Nationally agreed definitions of disability for data collection
Funding for state/territory training (MSSD) with some important guiding
principles:
•
•




Refunding of Positive Partnerships 2012-2014
Review of Disability Standards for Education (2005)
Schools Disability Advisory Council
ACARA




•
Strive to support students in all setting and meet level of need
Recognise different schooling arrangements, including resourcing
Australian Curriculum (content, assessment, not pedagogy)
Is special education a cross-curriculum issue/ embedded/inclusive or pre-F?
NAPLAN
MySchool website and special needs data
AITSL

Inclusion aspects recognised in standards (eg: 1.3, 1.5,1.6,3.1,4.1,5.3)
© R Conway, 2012
Four key issues
– outcomes to date

Nationally consistent data

Gonski Review and disability

Disability adjustment categories

Disability Standards for Education 2005 and
review
© R Conway, 2012
Categories of disability under
National Consistent Data

Physical

Cognitive

Sensory

Social/Emotional
DEEWR, 2012
Key Gonski Review findings
We need to lift
performance:
We need to improve
funding:
• Australia’s standing in
international comparisons is
slipping
• Student performance needs to
lift, particularly for the lowest
performers
• Multiple and/or concentrated
disadvantage adversely affects
outcomes
• Current funding is not linked to
educational outcomes
• Funding is not logical, consistent
or publicly transparent
• Public funding should reflect
school and student
characteristics, regardless of
sector
DEEWR, 2012
Development of a funding loading for
students with disability from Gonski
There is no nationally consistent data regarding students with disability
and hence no recommendations could be made on this funding.
The Review of Funding for Schooling recommended that work on
collecting nationally consistent data on students with disability should
be progressed as a priority – now agreed.
Significant additional and collaborative work is required to develop a
funding loading for students with disability. This work is being
progressed through the Strategic Policy Working Group.
It will be informed by the Ministerial Reference Group, the Australian
Education, Early Childhood Development, Senior Officials Committee
(AEEYSOC) (through relevant working groups) and the Australian
Government Schools Disability Advisory Council.
DEEWR, 2012
Disability categories –
Descriptors for adjustment
No adjustments at this time
Supplementary
Substantial
Extensive
DEEWR, 2012
DEEWR, 2012
Disability Standards for Education
2005
© R Conway, 2012
Who is affected by the DSE
 Early
Childhood (not childcare
providers)
 Schools (government & registered)
 Post school education and training
 Higher Education
 Accrediting bodies
 All types of delivery
© R Conway, 2012
Standards covered in the DSE
 “On
the same basis”
 Enrolment
 Participation
 Curriculum development, accreditation
and delivery
 Student support services
 Harassment and victimisation
© R Conway, 2012
DSE Participation compliance






Flexibility
Alternate activities to ↑ participation
Negotiate, agree and implement programs to
↑ participation
Additional support to assist achievement of
learning outcomes
Reasonable substitute activities for those
who can’t participate
Non-classroom and extra-curricula activities
are designed to include the student
© R Conway, 2012
DSE Curriculum development,
accreditation and delivery compliance
 Reasonable adjustment to:
 Curriculum
 Teaching materials
 Assessment and certification
 Teaching and learning activities
 delivery modes including non-classroom
 Assessment procedures and methodologies
adapted to allow students to demonstrate
knowledge skills and competencies
© R Conway, 2012
Disability Standards Review
recommendations – comments by
DEEWR
14 recommendations covering 5 key themes:

greater awareness

Additional clarity for some legal definitions

Access and participation, discrimination and inclusion

Contemporary education practice

Accountability, complaints and compliance processes.
DEEWR, 2012
Inclusive education in
Australian schools
Still resistance to “reasonable adjustment” based
on lack of skills, resources, time
• Outcomes-driven curriculum and assessment
deters focus on special needs
• Still resistance to enrolments of students with
special needs without teacher aide or special
needs teacher support (particularly in secondary)
• Issues of “generic” special education staff in some
states/territories and whether they can meet the
needs
•
© R Conway, 2012
Achieving effective behaviour, learning
and teaching (BLT)
Curriculum issues
•linking current and past
learning
Instructional issues
•pacing instruction (task size)
•how achievable is the task or
materials?
•types and amounts of feedback
•does the student identify the
goal of the task and recognise
its relevance and application?
•strategies such as prompting,
modelling, chaining
The learning context
•classroom management and
organisation
•classroom climate
•productive learning time
Effective learning and
teaching experiences
•communication processes
© R Conway, 2012
We need to
be realistic
in our
expectations
of all
students
© R Conway, 2012
What do we need to do to improve
PL provisions in schools?
•
Need for sustained PL, not one-off sessions
•
Engage all staff (including school leaders) in PL that:
–
–
–
–
–
–
•
Increases teacher self-efficiency to differentiate L&T
Increases student academic engagement through reasonable
adjustment
Provide strategies to address behaviour issues that emerge from
lack of engagement – BLT
Encourages teachers to be collaborative in addressing their and
student needs
Supports, not blames teachers
Is evidenced-based and locally relevant
Do we need disability-specific PL or generic?
–
Role of PP model and students with ASD
© R Conway, 2012
A changed model?
Integration approach
Inclusionary approach







Focus on student
Assessment by
specialists
Diagnostic outcome
Student program
Placement in a
program
Boundaries




Focus on classroom
Examine teaching &
learning factors
Strategies for teacher
Adaptive and
supportive classroom
programs
No boundaries
(After Porter, 1995)
Three areas still in debate
1.
Principles behind inclusion
2.
Evidence for the success or otherwise of
inclusive practices
3.
Mechanics: the technical changes
needed to make inclusion happen
© R Conway, 2012
Paradigm changes

Schools are the centre of analysis – schools are
inclusive or not.

Change the way things work not the way they look –
both policies and practices.

Development of schools rather than including students
with a disability into existing arrangements.

Can we/ should we be truly inclusive?
© R Conway, 2012
So, where to?
Less emotion and resistance to meeting all students’
needs in a new Australian Curriculum
 Better targeted PL for schools and systems as a whole
 A continued range of placement options with the
option of moving into, and out of, special needs
settings
 A rethinking of what we mean by an inclusive school

“The challenge ahead is to appreciate that inclusion
is less about disability and more about social
change, school reform and educational
restructuring.”
(Roger Slee in O’Rourke, 2011)
© R Conway, 2012