Assessing the Quality of Learning Environments and Teaching Practice in Special Schools

Author(s):

Lotte Hedegaard-Soerensen(presenting / submitting)Susan Tetler(presenting)

Conference:

ECER 2014

Network:

04. Inclusive Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

04 SES 07 A, Inclusive Teaching

Paper Session

Time:

2014-09-03

17:15-18:45

Room:

B013 Anfiteatro

Chair:

Sara Felizardo

Contribution

This paper reports on findings from a study conducted in collaboration with SFI (National Institute of Social Research) and University of Aarhus, Department of Education. The study is initiated and financed by the Danish Ministry of Education and was conducted from January 2013 until February 2014. The study consists of four different parts: 1) A systematic review of research on the quality of special schools, 2) a national survey on headmasters in special schools in Denmark and educational psychologists in all Danish municipalities, 3) a survey of the pupil outcomes in special schools and 4) the development of a tool for evaluating the quality of teaching in special schools. This paper focuses on the fourth part: Development of a tool for evaluating the quality of learning environments and teaching practice in special schools.

The outset of the study, seen from the perspective of the Ministry of Education, is the challenge of providing meaningful and reliable comparative information about learner progress in special schools and about the quality of teaching in special schools. The monitoring of achievement and progress of learners in special school settings has often been less rigorous than in regular schools and the achievements of learners in these schools tend to go unrecognised and unscrutinised by national and international studies such as PISA and TIMSS which examine school attainment.

The objective of the fourth part of the study, in focus of this paper, was not to develop a tool for evaluating learner progress and achievement in special schools (as was the objective in a tool developed by McClushey, Wilson, Porter, Hannah, presented in the ECER conference in Istanbul, 2013). Rather, the objective of the study was two-fold: 1) to develop a tool for assessing the quality of teaching and to provide special schools with a tool for a systematic self-evaluation of their learning environments and 2) to meet the needs of the Danish Ministry of Education to develop a tool in order to get an overview over the quality of teaching and learning in special schools.

The theoretical framework for the research on assessing the quality of teaching consists of meta-reviews on teaching (Mitchel 2008, Meyer 2012, Danish Clearinghouse 2013) and a range of empirical-based studies on teaching in special schools (Berthén 2007, Beyer 2009, Tetler et al. 2009, Hedegaard-Sørensen 2010, Östlund 2012).

Thus the development of the tool for assessing the quality of teaching in special schools is built on research and theories about the quality of teaching in both regular schools and in special schools. The tool consists of eight main indicators for quality: a) School organization, b) professional collaboration, c) physical environment, d) a culture of supporting learning, e) planning for teaching and evaluating teaching, f) classroom leadership/teaching leadership, g) individualization and differentiation, h) pupil participation and assessment.

The purpose of the tool is to generate main indicators and sub-indicators in order to reflect on the quality of the learning environments and assess, whether teaching practice meets the indicators of quality. The reason for that is the common myth that the dominant pedagogical approach in special schools is more oriented towards the dimension of taking care of than that of teaching.

Method

The tool developed for teachers is based on both a theoretical framework (Mitchel 2008, Meyer 2012, Danish Clearinghouse 2013), a range of empirical-based studies (Berthén 2007, Beyer 2009, Tetler et al. 2009, Hedegaard-Sørensen 2010, Östlund 2012) and a partnership based project be-tween researchers and practitioners from specials schools (headmasters and teachers). This pro-ject is based on an action research approach (Bjørnsrud 2008). Thus, the tool for analyzing and assessing teaching practice was developed in partnership with teachers and headmasters from 16 special schools. During a two-day research seminar the teach-ers and headmasters participated in three different workshops. In two workshops the participants discussed and decided which indicators of quality they found covered their practice. The thrird workshop took the point of departure in the participants’ written narratives on situations in prac-tice that, seen from their perspectives, were perceived as ‘good’ situations. The participating teachers and headmasters were interviewed in groups about the presented narratives and about the quality characteristics of the situations. Thus, the three workshops generated data on the practitioners’ perceptions of quality of teaching practice. The workshop were all based on a phe-nomenological research approach (Giorgi 1985, Feldman 1994, Kvale 1994). And a narrative re-search approach (Bjørnsrud 2008, Hedegaard-Sørensen 2010). The data from the research seminar were analyzed with the purpose of finding indicators for quality in teaching from the perspective of special school practitioners. The indicators derived from both the research seminar and from the research reviews (Mitchel 2008, Meyer 2012), constituted the empirical data for the development of the tool. The second part of the partnership project consisted of a pilot study. The headmasters and teachers from special schools involved in the research seminar tested the tool and were afterwards interviewed about the use of it. The focus in these interviews was the relevance and main indicator and sub-indicators as well as the language and notions used in the tool. After another stage of analysis, adjustments to the tool were made.

Expected Outcomes

The outcome of the study is a tool for self-evaluating the quality of teaching practice. In the pro-cess of creating the tool in partnership between researchers and teachers/headmasters, two find-ings occur. First, in analyzing narratives about practice (together with practitioners and within the research group of six researchers) it is found that the quality of the pedagogical approach in spe-cial school also is characterized by an emphasis on the dimension of teaching. The second finding is related to the above. If good practice in special school is characterized by what is defined as good teaching in general (Meyer 2012), it makes sense and is adequate to describe good teaching in special schools from insights about good teaching in general (and brought to a head: Inclusive learning communities). As such, it makes sense to further explore the relationship between a good quality teaching approach and the notion of inclusive pedagogy which seeks to ‘extend what is generally available to everybody as opposed to providing for all by differentiating for some’ (Flori-an and Black-Hawkins 2011, p183).

References

Black Hawkins, K., Florian, L. and Rouse, M. (2007) Achievement and Inclusion in Schools. London: Routledge Florian, L. and Black-Hawkins, K. (2011) Exploring Inclusive Pedagogy, British Educational Research Journal, 5, vol. 37 Beyer, F. (2009) Individualisierung als Leitbild. Eine empirische Untersuchung zur spezifischen Qualität der Blinden- und Sehbehindertenpädagogik, PhD thesis, Humboldt Universitet, Berlin, Filosofisk Fakultet. Berthén, D. (2007) Förberedelse för särskildhet, särskolans pedagogiska arbeta i ett verksam-hetsteoretiskt perspektiv, PhD thesis, Stockholms Universitet. Bjørnsrud, H. (2008) Rom for aksjonslæring: Om tilpasset opplæring, inkludering og læreplanarbeid. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. Booth, T. & Ainscow, M. (2002) Index for Inclusion. Centre for studies on inclusive education (CSIE). Dyssegaard, C. B. & Larsen, M.S. (2013) Kvalitet på specialskoler: En ’brief’ systematisk forskningskortlæg-ning. København, Dansk Clearinghouse for Uddannelsesforskning. Earthman, GL. (2004) Prioritization of 31 Criteria for School Building Adequacy', American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Maryland. Accessed online on 30/04/07 at . Feldman, M. (1994) Strategies for interpreting qualitative data. London: Sage Publications. Flem, A., Moen, T. & Gudmundsdottir, S. (2004) Towards inclusive schools: A study of inclu-sive education in practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 19 (1), 85-98. Giorgi, A. (Ed.) (1985). Phenomenology and Psychological Research. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press. Hedegaard-Sørensen, Lotte (2010) Pædagogiske og didaktiske rum for elever med diagnosen asf, læreres selvforståelse og handling i (special)pædagogisk praksis. PhD thesis. København: Danmarks Pædagogiske Universitetsskole. Jank, W. og Meyer, H. (2002). Didaktische Modelle. Berlin: Cornelsen. Kvale, S. (1998). InterView. En introduktion til det kvalitative forskningsinter-view. (2. ed.). København: Hans Reitzel. McGregor, J 2004, 'Spatiality and the Place of the Material in Schools', Pedagogy, Culture and Society, vol. 12, no. 3 pp.347–372. McGregor, J 2004, 'Editorial', Forum, vol. 46, no. 1, p.2. McGregor, J 2004, 'Space, Power and the Classroom', Forum, vol. 46, no. 1, pp.13–18. Meyer, H, 2012 Hvad er god undervisning. København: Gyldendals Lærerbibliotek. Mitchel, D. (2008) What Really Works in Special and Inclusive education, Using evidence-based teaching strategies. Routledge. Siegel, J 1999, Architecture California, vol. 20, no. 1, in McGregor, J 2004, 'Editorial', Forum, vol 46. no. 1, .2 Tetler, S., Baltzer, K., Hedegaard-Sørensen, L. Boye, C og l: Andersen (2009). Pædagogiske vilkår for elever i komplicerede læringssituationer. In Effekter af specialundervisningen, eds. N. Egelund and S. Tetler. København: Danmarks Pædagogiske Universitetsforlag. Östlund, D. (2012) Deltagandets kontekstuelle villkor, fem träningsskoleklassers pædagogiska praktik, PhD thesis, Lunds Universitet.

Author Information

Lotte Hedegaard-Soerensen (presenting / submitting)

Aarhus University

Department of Education

Copenhagen

Susan Tetler (presenting)

Aarhus University, Denmark

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.