2.4. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION INTERNATIONALLY
2.4.3. Inclusive education in secondary schools
The vast majority of research into the implementation of inclusive policies has been conducted in primary schools. Forlin in 2005 discusses the need to shift focus from implementing inclusive education in primary schools to the implementation thereof in high schools. She has warned that until recently high schools have largely been able to accommodate learners with disabilities due to a lack of large numbers of students with disabilities in the secondary school phases; however, with the implementation of inclusive education in primary schools, more learners with disabilities will be entering high school than in previous generations (Forlin, 2005). There is an increasing number of students entering high school from inclusive primary schools with the expectation being that they will receive the same forms of support. She (Forlin, 2005: p.87) states that “the impact of inclusive education on regular schools has to date been marginal as these schools have mainly been able to avoid the large influx of students with disabilities experienced by primary schools”.
In addition to this, she encourages high schools to prepare for an increasingly diverse learner body, which if not catered for will result in more students being marginalised than in the past (Forlin, 2005). Forlin (2005: p. 87) warns of the “broadening diversity of student population in high schools and the challenges for students as they need to cope with increasing society pressures will see ever more potentially marginalised students who experience difficulties in accessing the regular class curriculum”.
As is a common conclusion in many studies as to the implementation of inclusive education, Forlin (2005) recommends that schools need to be given the freedom to adapt their inclusive models to the particular needs and environments in which the school is located. Similarly, the importance of strong and positive leadership in fostering an inclusive mind-set within a school is again highlighted.
Yet, beyond this there is very little research in terms of how to maintain and sustain inclusive practices once the dynamic leaders that build this mind-set leave the school (Forlin, 2005, pp. 90 – 91).
2.4.3.1. The gap between policy and school cultures
Research that looks specifically into how a secondary school can bridge the gap between inclusive policy and developing an inclusive culture was carried out in 2002 by Carrington and Elkins. From the first page of their report, they (Carrington & Elkins, 2002: p.1) highlight the need for “organisational support from a number of levels…if schools are going to achieve success in developing an inclusive school culture”. Their study highlighted four themes around the topic of what is needed to create schools that are able to accommodate effectively the needs of a diverse student body; namely collaborative problem-solving, inclusive beliefs, commitment to reflection, vision and change as well as planning and teaching for diverse learners (Carrington & Elkins, 2002). The study places significant focus on the practical markers, or the evidence, by which these themes can be identified as being in place within a school (Carrington & Elkins, 2002).
According to Carrington and Elkins (2002), collaborative problem-solving is symptomatic of a healthy school environment in which communication between staff members is encouraged with regards to those learners who have challenging learning needs. They go on to detail the role of the special education teacher in encouraging this communication, primarily through a motivational method as opposed to being involved with the teaching staff purely for training purposes. The evidence of collaborative problem-solving is entrenched in the staff seminars that such a profession would organise for the teaching staff in a school, which would include topics such as differentiated learning in the classroom and how to put this into practice, as well as promoting in a sense the needs and successes of learners who have achieved at a high level within the school in spite of significant barriers to learning. The special education teacher would also be getting involved in the teaching of regular classes through group teaching lessons with other teachers, and through regular meetings with heads of departments and heads of subjects to facilitate the flow of information from them to the rest of the teaching staff. Finally, and possibly most notably, this individual communicates with
the staff regarding what topics they would like to see covered in staff development workshops as opposed to simply planning a programme that the teachers are subjected to (Carrington & Elkins, 2002).
As has been a common trend in many of the studies conducted into inclusive education, this study (Carrington & Elkins, 2002) found that in schools which have successfully bridged the gap between policy and culture, you will find a staff base from which to work who believe in the values of inclusive education. At the time of the study they found that two extremes existed in schools with regards to inclusive beliefs. Some teachers would be vehemently against inclusion whilst others would be completely in support of inclusion. This can escalate into a major problem as these two attitudes cannot co-exist. It is imperative that a school has a common vision and opinion with regards to inclusive education. In schools which have managed to achieve this common vision, the evidence exists in the changing attitudes amongst the teachers. Within the school one will be aware of a shift in the understanding of what a good academic standard is. Whereas once the school may have thought of a good academic standard as being one that exists in a strictly results-driven academic environment, to one in which a good academic standard is considered to be a standard that allows for all learners to perform at the best of their ability (Carrington & Elkins, 2002).
A school that is an effective inclusion environment is a dynamic school in which the school community is continually looking for ways in which to improve and develop through a commitment to reflective practices, vision and change. Such schools approach change with enthusiasm and display a willingness to be critical of their current practices if required. The evidence of this is in the manner in which staff development opportunities are handled. In a reflective school, teachers who are sent on staff development opportunities are encouraged to share their experiences with their colleagues upon their return and the lessons learnt through the courses and workshops attended are used as a catalyst for reflection of the practices currently employed in the school (Carrington &
Elkins, 2002).
Finally, in terms of planning and teaching for diverse learners, Carrington and Elkins (2002: p.3) state that “inclusive schooling will require significant innovation and change in daily instruction approaches”. They expand on this concept by implying that it is imperative that there is a degree of multi-level teaching happening in classrooms as well as a willingness by teachers to practice differentiation in their classes. The commitment to teaching learners with diverse needs is evident in the range of options available to teachers and learners. A school with an inclusive culture has a wide
range of flexible options, ranging from individualised education packages to pull-out lessons or in- class support. Furthermore, in such a school, the learners receive the support they require because they want that support as opposed to having a support system (with which comes a certain stigma) thrust on them. Lastly, this is evident in the way in which teachers plan their lessons. Teachers in inclusive schools plan their lessons with the needs of a broad range of students in mind as opposed to planning a homogenous lesson to which all of the learners must conform (Carrington & Elkins, 2002).