Globally, Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) are of growing concern in education. Some regions of the world, however, have been slower than others in acknowledging the significance of this issue and in providing support for students, teachers and schools. Whilst funding is an issue in many developing countries (Eleweke & Rodda, 2002) others, such as Thailand, have experienced a slow response that is predominantly due to socio-cultural constraints and expectations. Furthermore, for pupils with special educational needs, the impact of wider principles of marketization on education may influence access to equitable provision (Rolfe, 2019).

This may be particularly pertinent given the present study context. Although there are a wide variety of school systems globally, the one that has seen the most rapid and expansive development within recent years is the international school system. Such schools are increasingly seen as a means of catering ‘not only for the globally mobile professional classes, but also for the socio-economically advantaged national elites for whom an English-medium form of education is perceived to bestow further advantage’ (Hayden, 2011, p.220). In an increasingly globalised and competitive society, an international school education has become especially sought after due to the belief that it may provide a head start into top universities, and subsequent employment within multi-national corporations (Lauder, 2007). Relatedly, international schools are under pressure to produce results, both for their pupils and parents as key stakeholders, but also to build their own reputation within a competitive and globalised educational marketplace. 

Despite the prevalence of international schools, little is known about how they cater for students with SEND. According to Pletser (2016) the tendency of international schools to exclude students with identified learning support needs has resulted in many school leaders becoming isolated from the field of learning support, and therefore fostering school cultures that fail to make adequate provision for such students. This lack of experience in working with or understanding the needs of a diverse range of learners presents a challenge to the ability of international schools to develop and change the mindsets of their stakeholders with regard to inclusion. An issue further complicated in the international school context amidst competing interpretations of, and attitudes towards, SEND and inclusive teaching practices (Brown and Bell, 2014).

To further complicate an already complex environment, international schools regularly and predominately recruit teachers from English speaking countries. Teachers in international schools may have very different expectations and interpretations of student learning and behaviour, depending on their cultural background (Deveney, 2005). There may be a wide range of training, experience, views and opinions amongst staff from different cultures both in terms of more general teaching approaches, and with particular regard to identifying and making provision for students with SEND.

The aims of the present research were threefold; (1) to address how Thai culture influences the acknowledgement of special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and the practice of inclusion in an international school, (2) to examine the impact of the perceptions of SEND held by both western and Thai staff on the acknowledgement of special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and the practice of inclusion in an international school, and (3) to ascertain the support and training provided to teachers working in an international school to support students with SEND and promote inclusive practices.

The research was carried out at a selective, fee-paying, British International School in Thailand that follows the UK National Curriculum. Students participate in admissions testing in order to gain entrance to the school, which consists of reading and writing tasks, and a verbal interview, designed to assess the ability of students to meet the academic demands of the English-language curriculum. The demographic of students is mixed, but predominantly consists of children that are Thai, or that have one Thai parent and one ‘foreign’ (usually western) parent. Other nationalities include British, American, Australian, European, Korean, Japanese and Chinese. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews with participants, followed by coding and analysis, which allowed for the identification of core themes within the data. Participants were recruited from leadership, teaching, and support staff at the school where the study was carried out. Efforts were taken to ensure a range of staff from different areas in the school were included i.e., leadership, teaching (from a range of subject and curriculum areas), and pastoral support staff. The research purposefully aimed to include a variety of nationalities, to gain an insight into the different cultural understandings of SEND and inclusion that existed within the school, and to particularly identify differences in the responses from Thai and Western staff. This research utilised grounded theory as its primary methodology for data collection and analysis. Grounded theory was selected as an appropriate method for this study due to the unique environment (i.e. in a single international school), and potentially wide range of participants found within the school (in terms of their culture and experience). Due to adopting a grounded theory approach, systematic coding and analysis of data began in the early stages of data collection (Tuetteman, 2003). This analysis of data allowed the researcher to draw out ‘theoretically relevant’ data and identify patterns and relationships as they emerged (Wimpenny & Gass, 2000).

One of the driving themes of the research to date is the impact of Thai cultural attitudes on the inclusion of people with SEND, both broadly within society and specifically within education. In interview responses, both Western and Thai teaching staff expressed that there is a lack of understanding and support for people with SEND in Thailand. Thai staff acknowledged that families of children with SEND often fear negative judgement from society. Western staff similarly identified the tendency in Thailand to dismiss, ignore or deliberately isolate those with SEND from wider society. The impact of westernised notions of SEND (held by international teachers) as they are applied to the local context of Thailand also appears to be salient. Early analysis of the data suggests that western teachers hold a view that their home countries understanding of, and provision for, SEND pupils was ‘superior’ to those of Thailand, and suggested that provision for pupils with SEND was not well addressed in Thai schools. Although acknowledging that in their experience, Thai schools did not cater well for those with SEND, Thai teachers were highly supportive of the idea of inclusive schooling, which was somewhat in contrast to western teachers views of Thai education and society more broadly. Additionally, where Western teachers were somewhat critical of the provision of the school, and unclear on its philosophy with regard to admitting and supporting students with SEND, Thai teachers were very complimentary of the support provided by the international school and offered no criticism of the current provision. In conclusion, it appears that whilst cultural understandings of SEND can differ extensively between Thailand and other, Western countries, an international school creates a ‘melting-pot’ of sorts, whereby native teachers willingly assimilate to, and demonstrate, more ‘Western’ notions of inclusivity within their teaching practice.

Brown, J. & Bell, S. (2014) Supporting young people with dyslexia in international schools: A case study example of current provision in Southeast Asia, Support for Learning, 29(2), 154-166 Deveney, B. (2005) An investigation into aspects of Thai culture and its impact on Thai students in an international school in Thailand, Journal of Research in International Education, 4(2) 153–171 Eleweke, C. J. & Rodda, M. (2002) The challenge of enhancing inclusive education in developing countries, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 6(2), 113-126 Hayden, M. (2011) Transnational spaces of education: the growth of the international school sector, Globalisation, Societies and Education 9(11), 211-224 Lauder, H. (2007) Chapter 36: International Schools, Education and Globalization: Towards a Research Agenda in Hayden, M., Levy, J. & Thompson, J. The SAGE Handbook of Research in International Education, Los Angeles: Sage Publications Ltd. Pletser, J. (2016) Removing Barriers to Learning, Enabling International Schools to Respond to Diverse Needs: Identifying The Climate And Conditions, Published doctoral dissertation, University of Bath Rolfe, S. (2019) Models of SEND: the impact of political and economic influences on policy and provision, British Journal of Special Education, 46(4), 423-444 Tuetteman, E. (2003) Grounded Theory Illuminates Interpersonal Relationships: An Educator’s Perspective, in O’Donoghue, T. & Punch, K. (Eds) Qualitative Educational Research in Action: Doing and Reflecting. London: Routledge Falmer. Wimpenny, P. & Gass, J. (2000) Interviewing in phenomenology and grounded theory: is there a difference? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31(6), 1485-1492