4.2. QUESTIONNAIRE
4.2.3. Professional development
institution. All of these teachers considered this training to be useful but lacking in applicability. This is a worrying trend as training from the department of education accounts for the majority of training occurring in the area of inclusive education in South Africa. It would appear from the respondents’ scores that they found the theoretical training to be useful but that this training was not set in the context of a classroom. As was seen repeatedly in the literature review, it is vital to ensure that any training given to teachers is based on the classroom environment in which they are expected to implement the new measures and policies.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to inclusive education – whilst in-service from the school that I teach at.
Of the total group, 38 of the teachers responded that they had received sufficient training, but 21 responded that they had not. Of the schools researched, 100% of the teachers at School BP responded that they had received training whilst at the school and they assigned an average score of 4 to this training. Hence they found the training to be generally useful and somewhat applicable to the classroom situation. A similar situation existed at School CP, where 80% of the teachers had benefitted from staff development pertaining to inclusive education directly from the school in which they teach. On the other end of the spectrum, at School CI only 20% of the staff had benefitted from this form of staff development. As can be seen in Figure 5.7, the scores of these 3 schools indicate a high correlation between the percentage of staff members who benefitted from staff development, and the schools’ overall scores for school environment and to a lesser degree, to the scores’ allocated for the educator as an inclusive practitioner. School CI has managed to strike a balance in providing staff training to develop the teacher as an inclusive practitioner as well as to develop an inclusive school environment. However, School BP has focused on nurturing an inclusive school environment. Regardless of the minor details, it is clearly evident that those schools who have invested in staff development for inclusive education within the school, have been able to create schools that are more conducive to inclusive education. There is a definite link between the level of staff development occurring in a school and the ability of the school to implement inclusive education.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to inclusive education – whilst in-service from non-governmental organisations
Of the 60 teachers who responded, only 13 had benefitted from some form of training offered by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and there was an even spread amongst the schools indicating that NGOs are not targeting specific schools for training but rather offering training that
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
SCHOOL BP
SCHOOL CP
SCHOOL BG
SCHOOL CG
SCHOOL GP
SCHOOL CI
Percentage
Scores
School Environment Score Educator Score
% who received training from school
Figure 4.7 Correlation between scores and percentage of teachers who received training from the school.
people can enrol for. Of interest, however, is that from these 13 people the average rating of this training was 3.6 implying that the training was somewhat successful in that they found it to be useful and to have some applicability in the classroom itself.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to inclusive education – whilst in-service from institution at which I have enrolled in courses targeting inclusive education.
Fourteen of the teachers responded that they had in fact enrolled in courses focusing on inclusive education. The greatest number of teachers from any school to pursue this mode of training was 4 teachers from School BG followed by 3 teachers each from School CG and School CP. Schools BG and CG are of particular interest as these are both government schools that have received little by way of training from the education department or from internal staff development programmes. This indicates that there are teachers at these schools who have identified this as an area in which they must improve their skills and have made a concerted effort to do so. As was the case with the training offered by the NGOs, this training was viewed favourably by the participants with an average score of 3.5 indicating that they found this to be mostly useful.
Whilst questions 3.1 to 3.5 focused on general training in the area of inclusive education, questions 3.6 to 3.10 were designed to focus specifically on the training these teachers have been exposed to in terms of learning disabilities, as this is the most common barrier to learning addressed in affluent schools where parents generally have the financial resources available to investigate a child’s poor academic performance. The difference between the two sets of questions was clearly marked.
Interestingly, one respondent did not note this difference and labelled the questions as ‘repetition’
implying that inclusive education refers only to the inclusion of learners with learning disabilities.
This is a misconception that I have frequently been faced with in the past 6 years that I have been working in the field of inclusive education.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to learning disabilities – during my initial teacher training.
Of the 60 teachers who responded, 24 stated that they had received some training in the area of teaching learners with learning disabilities. This indicates that some of these teachers received training in learning disabilities, but not in the area of inclusive education as a whole. In comparing the results of 3.1 and 3.6, a clear pattern emerges. Those teachers’ who have received training in learning disabilities, but not in inclusive education as a whole, are generally those with the most teaching experience (over 15 years) indicating that there has been a shift in the initial teacher training programmes from a focus on learning disabilities to a broad focus on inclusive education as a whole in more recent times. Contrastingly, the teachers with less teaching experience who presumably trained in the last 15 years reported that their training focused specifically on inclusive education and not on learning disabilities. This represents a shift in terms of the diversity seen in South African schools in the past 15 years and the subsequent shift in teacher training programmes to address a greater spectrum of diversity.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to learning disabilities – whilst in-service from the Department of Education.
It would appear from these results that there has been a focus on addressing learning disabilities in schools by the Department of Education, rather than focusing on inclusive education as a whole. 10 teachers reported receiving training pertaining to learning disabilities, whilst only 5 had received training in inclusive education. The average score allocated to the training in learning disabilities was 3.3 and in line with the score allocated in question 3.1 to the training of teachers in matters pertaining to inclusive education.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to learning disabilities – whilst in-service from the school I teach at.
The scores for this question were identical to the scores achieved in question 3.3 indicating that when staff development is carried out in a school context, learning disabilities are addressed as an element of inclusive education as opposed to being a completely separate issue. It is clear from the
scores in these two questions that the majority of in-service training with regards to inclusive education is happening within the schools themselves and not from outside organisations or bodies.
This has an enormous impact in terms of where this study should be focusing when looking at staff development programmes. It is also in line with the international literature that indicates the most effective training takes place within the environment to which the participants have to apply it. In other words, the training is taking place within the same school context that the teachers are expected to implement inclusive education.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to learning disabilities – whilst in-service from non-governmental organisations.
From this question it is clear that NGOs offering training are tending to focus on inclusive education as a whole, as opposed to focusing on the single barrier to learning of learning disabilities. Whilst 13 teachers responded that they had received training in matters pertaining to inclusive education from NGOs, only 10 teachers from the same group have received training that focuses specifically on learning disabilities.
I have received sufficient professional development in matters pertaining to learning disabilities – whilst in-service from institutions at which I have enrolled in courses targeting learning disabilities.
Whilst 14 teachers had enrolled in courses about inclusive education, only 8 teachers had enrolled in courses aimed specifically at teaching learners with learning disabilities. This could indicate that more teachers are confident in terms of teaching learners with learning disabilities than they are in teaching learners with other barriers to learning; or it could be that the courses in which they enrolled simply focused more on inclusive education as a general topic than on learning disabilities in particular. This topic will be explored further in the questionnaire.