Difference Between Dialogue and Conceptualisation

Author(s):

Giorgia Ruzzante(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2016

Network:

04. Inclusive Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

04 SES 04 A, Dialogue, Communication and Structural Social Relationships

Paper Session

Time:

2016-08-24

09:00-10:30

Room:

OB-H2.20

Chair:

Jo Rose

Contribution

The recent Italian laws about SEN (Special Educational Needs) requires Italian School to wonder about the quality of the inclusion realized. We have one of the most advanced laws about inclusion in schools, but it is necessary to introduce systematical procedures of evaluation about the quality of inclusion which is realized in schools for the advancement of inclusion, with the building of inclusive cultures, policies and practices (Booth, Ainscow, 2014).

Within an instrument created in order to evaluate the quality of inclusion, the Repertoire of Commitment for Inclusion (Santi, Ghedin, 2010), I take care of the section about how to create inclusive cultures, in particular to formulate commitments about differences in education, thus meaning the whole differences which are present in school (disability, SEN, different languages, different cultures, gender) for the implementation of a view of inclusion above the labels of disability, Learning Disabilities and Special Educational Needs in school of “class of differences” where differences are appreciated like a resource and not as an obstacle for learning and teaching. The construction of the commitments for inclusion is participating, within the model of research-action, from the conceptualizations of children, teachers and headmasters.

Our research question is: how should we build the concept of “difference/diversity” from the protagonists of school? To paraphrase Austin (How to do things with words, 1975), the words about difference built the concept and connote it positively, negatively or neutrally. The research aims to give a recognition of the different meanings of the words “inclusion”, “difference/diversity” and their conceptual construction from pupils of primary schools and teachers in training in special education with the philosophical Community of Inquiry Philosophy for Children (Lipman, 2005) and from headmasters with individual interviews.

The objectives of research are: emphasize the spontaneous ideas of difference; identifying the new conceptualizations emerging from the co-construction of the concept of difference in P4C (conceptual changement/transformation); finding out significant and recurring nuclei of concepts; analyzing the argumentative processes that support the concept of difference.

The theoretical framework of my research are interdisciplinary: socio-cultural constructivism (Leont’ev, Vygotskij, Dewey), inclusive pedagogy and special education (Caldin, Canevaro, Booth, Ainscow), argumentation and discussion in class (Mason, Pontecorvo, Santi) and Community of Inquiry-Philosophy for Children (Lipman, Sharp, Santi, Kohan, Skliar).

Method

This research is qualitative and explorative. Its research aim to explore the conceptualizations of “inclusion” and “difference/diversity” and their co-construction from headmasters with individual interviews and from teachers and students of primary school (age from 7 to 9) between the Inquiry Community of Philosophy for Children. Teachers are also students of the course in special education. The context of the research for children and teachers is the community of inquiry (the class transformed in a community) Philosophy for Children (Santi, 2006). Philosophy for Children is an international educational experience. It was born in the 1970’s in the USA by Matthew Lipman, who created a philosophy curriculum for children. It consists in a community of research animated by philosophical discussions and conducted by a teacher/facilitator of the community. The collection of data was made with the sessions of P4C for pupils and teachers and from individual semi-structured interviews for headmasters. Instead, for headmaster the context of the collection data collection is an individual interview. Starting with the key words we considered43 relevant for the field of inclusion (inclusion, SEN: special educational needs, inclusive classes, teachers in special education, inclusive culture/policy/practice), we formulated the questions in order to examine the conceptions of inclusion in headmasters. The interviews are semi-structured and formed of eight questions and were conducted individually to five headmasters all over the Italian Region Veneto. They came from schools very different schools as regards concerning location, size of the school and socio-economical context. The Research participants are: • N.4 classes of the second year and n.4 classes of the fourth year of primary school, from three different schools; • N.4 groups of teachers (from 8 to 20 partecipants for session) in training for special education; • N. 5 headmasters. The instruments of research are the rielaborated materials of the original curriculum of philosophy for children by Lipman and Sharp, the list of the questions for the interviews, the audio-registration of the sessions and interviews and their transcriptions. The Text analyses are qualitative, with the selection of the most relevant part of the texts, the detection of the most relevant and recurrent concepts and the codification process is made with the use of by means of the software Atlas.ti. The Data analysis is both as top-down than bottom-up, with a posteriori codification of text, like the Grounded Theory.

Expected Outcomes

As results, there will be the comparison between the results obtained by the conceptualizations by interviews and the community of inquiry P4C. How far are the conceptualizations of children, teachers and headmasters from the definitions of the educational scientific research? From the discussions with pupils, it emerges that they have an articulate and wide conception of difference/diversity, and they use both of two terms with the same meaning, even if the conceptualisations that emerge came out are related with the pedagogical conception of difference. They often report episodes of real life linked to inclusion. As a conclusion, P4C creates a naturally inclusive context in class, where everyone makes his/her contribution at the collective discussion, and so the conceptual background of the children can emerge. From the interviews, it emerges criticisms about the training of headmasters concerning inclusion. They recognize the importance of inclusion, but they don’t feel enough qualified in this field and they don’t have time to dedicate at this argument. In fact, today headmasters spend most of their time in administrative issues. Moreover, they don’t know the instruments for evaluating the quality of inclusion in schools. The Headmasters haven’t a complete awareness of their important role about inclusion in schools, and they delegate this task to some of their teachers.

References

Associazione Treelle, Caritas Italiana, Fondazione Agnelli (a cura di), Gli alunni con disabilità nella scuola italiana. Bilancio e prospettive, Erickson, Trento, 2011 Austin J., Come fare cose con le parole, Marietti, 1987 (Austin J., How to Do Things with Words) Baldacci M., Una scuola a misura di alunno, UTET, 2002 Booth T., Ainscow M., Nuovo Index per l’inclusione, Carocci, Roma, 2014 (Booth T., Ainscow M., Index for inclusion, CSIE, 2002) Booth T., The name of the rose: inclusive values into action in teacher education, in PROSPECTS, September 2011, Volume 41, Issue 3, pp 303-318 Caldin R., Introduzione alla pedagogia speciale, Cleup, Padova, 2001 Canevaro A. (a cura di), L' integrazione scolastica degli alunni con disabilità. Trent'anni di inclusione nella scuola italiana, Trento, Erickson, 2007. Canevaro A., Le logiche del confine e del sentiero, Trento: Ed. Erickson, 2006. Canevaro A., Pietre che affiorano. I mediatori efficaci in educazione con la “logica del domino”, Erickson, Trento, 2008 Cosentino A., Oliverio S., Comunità di ricerca filosofica e formazione. Pratiche di coltivazione del pensiero, Liguori, Napoli, 2011 Dovigo F., Fare differenze. Indicatori per l'inclusione scolastica degli alunni con Bisogni Educativi Speciali, Trento, Erickson, 2007 European Agency, Key Principles for Promoting Quality in Inclusive Education, 2009 Ianes D., Cramerotti S. (a cura di), Alunni con BES-Bisogni Educativi Speciali, Trento, Erickson, 2013. Lipman M., Educare il pensiero, Vita e Pensiero, Milano, 2005 Pontecorvo C. (a cura di), Discorso e apprendimento, Carocci, Roma, 2005 Pontecorvo C., Ajello A.M., Zucchermaglio C., Discutendo si impara, Carocci, Roma, 2004 Santi M., Costruire comunità di integrazione in classe, Lecce: Pensa Multimedia, 2006 Santi M., Oliverio S. (a cura di), Educating for Complex Thinking through Philosophical Inquiry, Liguori, Napoli Santi M., Ghedin E., Valutare l’impegno verso l’inclusione: un Repertorio multidimensionale, in Giornale Italiano della Ricerca Educativa, (V) p.99-111. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia, 2012 Santi M. (a cura di), Philosophy for children: un curricolo per imparare a pensare, Liguori, Napoli,2006 Santi M., Ragionare con il discorso. Il pensiero argomentativo nelle discussioni in classe, Liguori, Napoli, 2006 Terzi L., Beyond the dilemma of difference: The capability approach to disability and special educational needs, Journal of Philosophy of Education 39 (3):443–459 (2005)

Author Information

Giorgia Ruzzante (presenting / submitting)

Università degli Studi di Padova

FISPPA Department of

Padova

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.