Responding To Diversity, Constructing Difference: A Comparative Case-Study Of Individual Planning In Schools In England And Portugal

Author(s):

Ines Alves(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2014

Network:

04. Inclusive Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

04 SES 06 C, Individualised Planning and Assessment

Paper Session

Time:

2014-09-03

15:30-17:00

Room:

B026 Anfiteatro

Chair:

William Kinsella

Contribution

The most common form of individual planning mentioned in educational policy consists of individual education plans (IEPs) for children with “special education needs” (e.g. UK SEN Code of Practice, Portuguese Law 3/2008, Italian Law 104/1992). However, despite the apparent similarities, what is meant by individual planning and special education needs varies significantly both in space and time and this creates a major challenge when doing comparative research. For this reason in this study a broad definition of individual planning was used, and this was shared and discussed with the participants of the study. This way the assumption of a common understanding of what is meant by individual planning and special education needs was avoided. In a truly ‘inclusive’ spirit, the starting point in this study was not the “SEN” group, it was first of all finding out who were the students identified by teachers as needing individual planning (e.g. in England students on school action, students with English as an additional language, students below average - reported in ECER 2011). The next step was to understand what forms of individual planning were used and what provision was in place for those students.

This report focuses specifically on this last part of the study, aiming to answer the following research questions: What types of (individual) planning are used by schools? What provision/ interventions are linked to individual plans in England and Portugal?

However, this paper shares the overarching aims of the doctoral comparative study which focuses on the construction of difference (Minow, 1990). These are (1) to study the mechanisms of construction and management of difference in education and (2) to compare processes and underlying assumptions in schools in two countries, exploring cultural aspects and system characteristics.

Method

The study was conducted through a nested case-study in mainstream, primary and secondary schools in England and Portugal. A maximum of 6 students who had individual planning and provision (England: eleven Year 2 and twelve Year 6 pupils, Portugal: six Year 1 and twelve Year 4 pupils) were identified by their primary school teachers in 2009/2010. Pupils’ cases were followed up on 2010/2011 with a view to follow the changes in planning and the construction of the notion of difference around a group of children over a 2-year period. Staff members (n=34) in 4 primary schools and 10 secondary schools were interviewed, namely class teachers, SEN coordinators, heads of year and teaching assistants. A total of 32 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Additionally, documentary evidence was collected from all schools, such as planning documents in use (IEPs, IBP, provision maps), SEN register and existing SEN reports. The data corpus was analysed qualitatively, through an iterative process of thematic analysis. A comparative analytical cultural historical framework (Artiles & Dyson, 2005) and a “societal approach” (Hantrais & Mangen, 2007) were useful theoretical resources during the design of the study and cross-national comparative analysis, respectively.

Expected Outcomes

This study problematises individual planning as the solution for the challenges schools face when dealing with increasing student diversity. It focuses on the process of constructing and responding to difference through the lenses of individual planning/ provision. Data shows that especially in England individual planning comes in various shapes and sizes and that IEP means different things, even within the same country. When responding to student diversity, teachers in England are expected to differentiate their planning in a variety of ways (activities, targets and resources physical/ human available to students). Schools have a variety of structures and interventions to deal with student diversity. Additionally, most schools, particularly secondary schools, group pupils based on their ability (set), for teaching purposes. This can be linked to the standards of achievement set by the National Curriculum and appears to play a key role in how difference is constructed. In Portugal, on the other hand, differentiation is not a common practice and the divide ‘SEN’/ non-‘SEN’ is a lot stronger and has a direct effect on access to extra support. The policy contexts of these two countries provide teachers with repertoires of ways to construct and respond to student diversity.

References

Artiles, A. J., & Dyson, A. (2005). Inclusive education in the globalization age: The promise of comparative cultural-historical analysis. In D. Mitchell (Ed.), Contextualizing Inclusive Education: Evaluating old and new international persectives. Abingdon: Routledge. Hantrais, L., & Mangen, S. (Eds.). (2007). Cross-National Research Methodology & Practice. Abingdon: Routledge. Minow, M. (1990). Making all the difference: Inclusion, Exclusion and American Law. Ithaca: Cornell University.

Author Information

Ines Alves (presenting / submitting)

University of Manchester

Manchester Institute of Education, SEED

nottingham

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.