Employing Social Network Analysis to Examine the Social Networks of Students Identified as Having Special Educational Needs in Inclusive Settings

Author(s):

Christoforos Mamas(presenting / submitting)Giovanna Schaelli(presenting)Alan J. Daly

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

04. Inclusive Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

04 SES 05 B, Social Participation of Students with Special Educational Needs and the Attitudes of their Peers

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-23

13:30-15:00

Room:

W6.16

Chair:

Anke de Boer

Contribution

Students identified as having special educational needs (SEN) represent a distinct but heterogeneous group within the educational system. More recently and as a result of international efforts, there has been a growing momentum towards more inclusive educational provision in general education settings, especially within elementary schools. It is increasingly argued that students with SEN will particularly gain social benefits (Lindsay, 2007) as well as academic (Frederickson, Dunsmuir, Lang, & Monsen, 2004) by being more included in general education classrooms. Inclusive settings are seen by parents and educators as providing more opportunities for enhanced social outcomes, such as increased friendships, social interactions with peers and active participation in social and play activities (Boer, Pijl, & Minnaert, 2010; Symes & Humphrey, 2011). Parents in particular hope that their child can build positive relationships with typically developing peers (Koster, Pijl, Nakken, & Van Houten, 2010). Additionally, Avramidis and Norwich’s (2002) classic review of teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion showed evidence of positive attitudes, but found no evidence of acceptance of a total inclusion or ‘zero reject’ approach to special educational provision. Despite the rhetoric, there is substantial evidence to show that students identified as having SEN predominantly remain socially excluded and are likely to have fewer friends (Bossaert, Colpin, Pijl, & Petry, 2013; Mamas, 2013; Pijl, et al., 2008).

Two main research questions are being addressed:

1. What is the position of SEN students in the classroom social networks?

2. What does the structure of the network may reveal about the social participation of SEN students?

This paper draws on a comparative study between two countries; USA and Switzerland. In particular, a critical case study design (Yin, 2009) has been adopted to examine the concept of social participation from a social network perspective in four classrooms, across two schools, one in each country. This study draws on the theory of social capital (Putman, 2000). Social capital represents our well-developed theory as part of the critical case study design, and the four classrooms/cases were chosen on the grounds that they would allow a better understanding of this theory (Bryman, 2012) in terms of students’ social interactions and friendships in their classrooms’ social networks. The term social capital has been used to describe norms and certain resources that emerge from social networks (Ferlander, 2007). Putnam (2007, p. 137) defined social capital as ‘social networks and the associated norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness’. According to Scott (2013), social networks are a particular form of social capital that individuals/students, can employ to enhance their advantages or opportunities. A notion of social capital is that social relationships provide access to resources that can be exchanged, borrowed and leveraged to facilitate achieving goals (Moolenaar, Sleegers, & Daly, 2012). Therefore, classroom social networks built up through friendship ties or other relational ties may provide access to social capital.

Method

Data are being collected through a social network questionnaire and social network analysis was employed to analyze the data. Students were asked to identify their friends in the classroom, who they play with during recess, who they are asking for help when the teacher is not around, and finally who they talk to if they are having a bad day. As this study in in progress, it is expected to collect over sixty questionnaires across the four classrooms. Social network maps for each classroom will be developed and network measures will be calculated at two levels of analysis, namely the network level (centralization, reciprocity), and node level (centrality: in-degree). First, at the whole network level, we will apply the measure of centralization which refers to the extent a whole graph has a centralized structure and thus is organized around particular focal points. This measure is calculated by summing ‘the difference between each node’s centrality and the centrality of the most central node’ (Borgatti, et al., 2013, p.160). Second, reciprocity will be employed. One way of calculating reciprocity is to divide the number of reciprocated dyads by the total possible number of adjacent dyads. In classroom friendship networks, a classroom that has many reciprocated friendships between students may be a more inclusive and socially responsive where students enjoy learning as they feel socially valued and integrated. At the node level of analysis, we are particularly interested in examining the in-degree of students with SEN compared to that of their peers without identified SEN. In-degree centrality falls under node level centrality which is defined as a property of a node’s structural position in a network (Borgatti, et al., 2013). In a classroom network, centrality indicates specific aspects of the quantity of the pattern of ties that surround an individual making them more or less socially “active” in a network. For example, within a friendship network centrality may reveal students who are popular or isolated based on the number of incoming ties to the actor. Students who have high in-degree centrality are usually popular within the classroom.

Expected Outcomes

Conducting social network analysis, as an innovative and interdisciplinary set of tools, enables for a deeper understanding of the structure of networks where all students in a classroom reside as well as identifying the position of individual students within the network, especially those with SEN. The findings from each case/classroom are expected to be revealing of the social participation of students identified as having SEN and may provide an additional layer of understanding with regards to the social responsiveness and inclusion of each classroom. In line with previous studies on social participation of students with SEN, the position of these students in the classroom social networks is expected to be peripheral rather than central. It is anticipated that in-degree centrality scores will be lower for students identified as having SEN. In networks were centralization scores are lower, it is expected that the structure of the classroom networks will be conducive to better ‘flow’ of social capital, thus enhancing the inclusion of students with SEN. In terms or reciprocity, it is expected that higher reciprocity levels will result in more social responsiveness and inclusion within a classroom network.

References

Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers' attitudes towards integration / inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129-147. doi:10.1080/08856250210129056. Boer, A. D., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2010). Attitudes of parents towards inclusive education: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 25(2), 165-181. doi:10.1080/08856251003658694. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2013). Analyzing social networks. Los Angeles i.e. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Bossaert, G., Colpin, H., Pijl, S. J., & Petry, K. (2013). Social Participation of Students with Special Educational Needs in Mainstream Seventh Grade. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1952-1956. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.147. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ferlander, S. (2007). The Importance of Different Forms of Social Capital for Health. Acta Sociologica, 50(2), 115–128. doi:10.1177/0001699307077654. Frederickson, N., Dunsmuir, S., Lang, J., & Monsen, J. J. (2004). Mainstream‐ special school inclusion partnerships: Pupil, parent and teacher perspectives. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(1), 37-57. doi:10.1080/1360311032000159456. Lindsay, G. (2007). Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 1-24. doi:10.1348/000709906x156881. Mamas, C. (2013). Understanding inclusion in Cyprus. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(4), 480-493. doi:10.1080/08856257.2013.820461. Pijl, S. J., Frostad, P., & Flem, A. (2008). The Social Position of Pupils with Special Needs in Regular Schools. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(4), 387-405. doi:10.1080/00313830802184558. Putnam, R. D. (2007). E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137-174. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x. Scott, J. (2013). Social Network Analysis (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE. Symes, W., & Humphrey, N. (2011). School factors that facilitate or hinder the ability of teaching assistants to effectively support pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) in mainstream secondary schools. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 11(3), 153-161. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01196.x. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

Author Information

Christoforos Mamas (presenting / submitting)

University of California, San Diego; University of Plymouth

Giovanna Schaelli (presenting)

University of Zurich

Alan J. Daly

University of California, San Diego

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.