Four Profiles Of Inclusive Supportive Teachers Perceptions Of Their Status And Role In Implementing Inclusion Of Students With Disabilities
Author(s):
Bella Gavish (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2017
Network:
04. Inclusive Education
Format:
Paper

Session Information

04 SES 12 B, Teachers in Inclusive Education: Roles, sentiments and strategies

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-25
09:00-10:30
Room:
W6.16
Chair:
Gottfried Biewer

Contribution

The aim of the research is to examine the perceptions of inclusive support teachers regarding their role in inclusion of students with disabilities in general education classrooms in Israel. 

 

The attempts to capture the concept of inclusion are probably more numerous than any other and appear in a great many contexts: legislative, social justice and human rights, location of learning, and schools as communities Shyman (2015). A moderate and very broad definition of inclusion is offered by Waitoller and Kozleski (2013):

Inclusive education is a continuous struggle toward (a) the redistribution of quality opportunities to learn and participate in educational programs, (b) the recognition and value of differences as reflected in content, pedagogy, and assessment tools, and (c) the opportunities for marginalized groups to represent themselves in decision-making processes that advance and define claims of exclusion and the respective solutions that affect their children's educational futures. (p. 543, emphases is the original)

Although inclusion practice requires mobilization of all school staff members, IST (Inclusive Support Teachers)   face the greatest challenges, and their role in the process is critical (Lamer-Dukes & Dukes, 2005). They carry out diverse, multi-faceted, and very dynamic tasks (Bilingsley, 2007). Their role – in its broad sense – includes creating a learning environment that support all students, prepare them for adulthood, and ensure their success in the community and cociety (Jorgensen, Schun, & Nisbet 2006). The core of the job is finding where general education intersects with the needs of students with disabilities (Sayeski, 2009).  In order to do so, IST coordinate and act as the link between all professional staff members associated with the students, (CEC, 2013

IST help improve the services provided to students with disabilities and fight barriers detrimental to their education. They help determine the vision of the school and integrate it into the curriculum, thus changing attitudes and beliefs among staff members regarding inclusive education and their expectations from students with disabilities.  IST guide teachers regarding appropriate practices for working with students with disabilities – both directly and indirectly, as role models - thus contributing to teachers` professional development. They lead collaborative teams engaged in inclusion, and help implement organizational changes in the school in order to advance it (Billingsley, 2007; Jorgensen et al., 2006).

The issues associated with the concept and practice of inclusion, as well as the role of IST, have acquired unique characteristics in Israel. Special education teachers in Israel fill two types of positions: Some are teachers in self-contained classrooms or in special-education schools specializing in specific student populations. Others are inclusive support teachers (IST). Their job is to work with students with disabilities attending general education classes. Among their tasks is conducting individual or group instruction inside or segregated from general classrooms, planning IEPs, preparing adapted teaching materials for the use of general education teachers, advising general education teachers vis-à-vis inclusion, and advising parents (Avissar, 2012; Avissar, Moshe, & Licht, 2013).

IST come to their schools equipped with knowledge and skills acquired during their training and must adapt them and themselves to the organizational structure of their particular school. In this way they both carve out their place and fashion the roles they will assume in the school. How they do so is critical to the implementation of inclusion practice and the capacity of their schools to address students’ disabilities. Furthermore, their perception of their work as IST may serve as a case study for implementation of inclusion in schools in Israel. The research presented in this article deals with these topics.

Intended purpose of the discussion to discuss implementation of inclusion and the IST rolls around the world.

 

Method

The research entailed a phenomenological qualitative multi-case study (Sabar Ben-Yehoshua, 2016). Such an approach is based on the assumption that in order to understand social phenomena, the voices of those experiencing them must be heard (Lester, 1999). Thirty-four IST took part in the study from 34 public schools – 24 elementary and 10 secondary. Of them, 29 were in the Jewish and five in the Arab sectors.. All teachers worked in general education classes. Each class had between two and six students diagnosed with special needs – LD, ADHD, ASD, ID, or EBD. The research began in a graduate course in special education that I taught. The process unfolded over a number of stages. During the first stage, the class was divided into work groups. Each group was asked to propose questions they would like to ask IST. We combined these questions in one document, tightening and honing them until we had an acceptable list. We recognized that the document would be used flexibly – the interviewers would be free to depart from it to ask clarifying questions and then return to it. The questions dealt with issues like work environments; interaction with staff members, parents, and students; work methods; and teachers' status in the school. During the next stage, we held interview simulations between students in the course. We practiced skills like not interrupting during a participant’s response; maintaining neutrality; and refraining from expressing opinions, judgments, and criticism (open or hidden) regarding the participants’ answers. Each student then interviewed one or two IST. The interviews were recorded and transcribed and then sent to me for review. After the interviews were transcribed, the students learned how to analyze them (as described in the following section), and later analyzed and interpreted their findings in term papers. After the course, I re-analyzed the interviews for the present research. The interview transcriptions were analyzed according to Giorgi and Giogi (2003) content analysis. The content was divided into themes and sub-themes with respect to the research question. The analysis produced two major themes that made it possible to position the teachers along two axes, depending on how they described themselves within the framework of school inclusion. To analyze the data and their validity, I relied on a research colleague. As customary in phenomenological research (Lester, 1999)

Expected Outcomes

Analysis of the interviews indicated that the attitude of IST toward their functions and status in the context of inclusion of students with special needs could be placed along two main axes: the first axis - status in the school “space” – ranged from perceptions of not belonging in the class or the school, to filling a central role as part of the team leading inclusion; The second axis - the nature and range of responsibilities - ranged from the perception of focusing only on students with special needs, to feeling overall responsibility for all the students in the school. Along these two axes we were able to discern four profiles of teachers; the profiles representing four different perceptions of their role: 1. Teachers who lack “place", who focus on defending students with special needs. “They didn’t want us in the classroom because they felt threatened.” 2. Teachers “on probation” in the general classroom, who focus on preparing students with special needs for integration into the general class. “Don’t give up on the general classroom because that’s the real test.” 3. Teachers filling a “solo” position on the inclusion hierarchy, who focus on supervising the “inclusionary space” of their students. “They already work with the child, and that’s only because we taught them to accept him.” 4. Teachers who enjoy a central leadership position in inclusion in conjunction with all faculty members responsible for the education of all students. “In our class we don’t differentiate between teachers – all children who need help can get it both from me and from the general education teacher.” The findings depict a process involving stages of evolution in interpretation and implementation of the inclusion concept, from considering it a vague idea, impossible to implement, to full and deep-seated understanding of it.

References

Avissar, G. (2012). Inclusive education in Israel from a curriculum perspective: An exploratory study. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 27, 35–49. Avissar, G., Moshe, A., & Licht, P. (2013). “These are basic democratic values”: The perceptions of policy makers in the Ministry of Education with regard to inclusion. In G. Avissar & S. Reiter (Eds.). Inclusiveness: From theory to practice (pp. 25–48). Haifa, Israel: AHVA Publishers. [In Hebrew]. Billingsley, B. S. (2007). Recognizing and supporting the critical roles of teachers in special education leadership. Exceptionality, 15, 163–176. CEC (Council for Exceptional Children). (2013). Retrieved from https://www.cec.sped.org/Standards/Special-Educator-Professional-Preparation/CEC-Initial-and-Advanced-Preparation-Standards. Giorgi, A.P., & Giorgi, B. M. (2003). The descriptive phenomenological psychological method. In P. Comic, J. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology (pp. 243–273). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Jorgensen, C. M., Shuh, M. C., & Nisbet, J. (2006). The inclusion facilitators’ guide. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Company. Lamar-Dukes, P., & Dukes, C. (2005). Consider the roles and responsibilities of the inclusion support teacher. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41, 55–61. Lester, S (1999). Introduction to phenomenological research. Taunton, England: Stan Lester Developments. Retrieved from https://www.rgs.org/NR/rdonlyres/F50603E0-41AF-4B15-9C84-BA7E4DE8CB4F/0/Seaweedphenomenologyresearch.pdf. Sabar-Ben Yehoshua, N. (2016). Traditions and genres in qualitative research : Philosophies, strategies and advanced tools. Tel Aviv: Mofet Institute. [In Hebrew]. Sayeski, K. (2009). Defining special educators' tools. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45, 38–44. Schanin, M. & Reiter, S. (2006(. From integration to inclusion: The model of the Tirat Carmel center for learning disabilities as a lever for the beneficial integration of children with special needs. ISER: Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation, 2, 19-32. [In Hebrew]. Waitoller, F. R., & Kozleski, E. B. (2013). Working in boundary practices: Identity development and learning in partnerships for inclusive education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 31, 35–45.

Author Information

Bella Gavish (presenting / submitting)
levinsky college of education
hod hasharon

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

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, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.