Suchergebnisse

This paper discusses major challenges for the development of teacher education for inclusion through an analysis of relevant recent experience in Malta. Inclusion in society and in education has been explicitly on the Maltese national agenda for the past two decades. The Faculty of Education of the University of Malta has been one of the main actors of the inclusion initiative and has also taken a European initiative through the recent co-ordination of a seven-country, 3-year European Union Comenius project on preparing teachers for responding to student diversity. This paper is based mostly on the reflective experience of the author at the Faculty of Education over the past several years. A brief picture of the Maltese education system is followed by a description of the challenges that have been encountered in the promotion of inclusion. These include the development of a rights-based approach to the education of persons with disability and the widening of its application to all minority or disadvantaged groups, and the impact of political and social contexts on the development of inclusive schools. These developments are then related to intertwined initiatives for teacher education for diversity that were further influenced by the leadership of deans and heads of the department in the faculty of education. Finally, four current issues are highlighted, namely: the strategic balance between the education of specialist educators and that of all teachers for diversity, and between specific and infusion models for such education, and, finally, the pedagogic balance between the academic and experiential learning about inclusion, and between the theory and practice of inclusive teaching. ; peer-reviewed

EU society and schools are both currently facing two major policy dilemmas regarding threats to social exclusion: (1) how to promote competitiveness while ensuring social cohesion (here focusing on solidarity as the attempt to reduce social inequalities); and (2) how to enhance integration while respecting the entitlement for inclusion of diverse individuals and groups. These are genuine and complex dilemmas in constant tension that have no final solution, but call for a continuous resolution of the balance between the two conflicting processes of each dilemma (Clark et al., 1999; cf. Eurydice, 1994). ; peer-reviewed

This paper aims at presenting an account of recent developments in inclusive education policy, discourse and practice in Malta. The inclusion initiative is placed within the opposite context of competitive and streaming practices prevalent in the Maltese education system. A brief account is given of how inclusive policy and practice have been influenced by the following: United Nations policies; local political developments; the setting up and activities of parent associations and a National Commission for Persons with Disability; and the action for persons with developmental disabilities of an effective Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), The recent development of a National Minimum Curriculum (NMC) with a wide consensus intended to ensure a quality education for all is seen as a very hopeful context for the achievement of inclusive education in Malta. A critical account of current perceptions, practices, concerns and aspirations for inclusive education in Malta is provided through a review of the very recent report of the Working Group on Inclusive Education set up as part of the strategy for the implementation of the NMC over the next five years. ; peer-reviewed

This literature review on Early Childhood Education (ECE)/Inclusive Early Childhood Education (IECE) is part of the 'Inclusive Early Childhood Education' project, conducted by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. The project's overall goal is to identify and analyse the factors that enable quality and effective pre-primary programmes for all children in inclusive early years settings. This review shows that international organisations and the European Union (EU) regard high-quality ECE/IECE as an essential foundation for lifelong learning. It is indispensable for success in modern knowledge-based economies. Participation in high-quality pre- primary education has long-lasting positive effects on children's development and the benefits are greater for children from a disadvantaged background (Frawley, 2014). In many cases, the early childhood stage is critical because many children's different needs are detected once they become part of the education system. Therefore, one EU benchmark in the strategic framework for European co-operation in education and training (ET 2020) is that at least 95% of children between the age of four and compulsory school age should participate in ECE. At the same time, there are concerns about the accessibility and quality of ECE/IECE provisions. Despite its importance – especially considering the latest data about provisions for children with special educational needs (SEN) and/or at risk of social exclusion (e.g. due to poverty) in Europe from birth to seven years – the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2004) reports that only one quarter of children with SEN are included in mainstream early education settings. This literature review aims to: • collect information about at-risk children and/or children with SEN in Europe at the pre-primary education level; • describe where those children are located during the pre-primary stages; • explore which resources are allocated to meet their needs; • describe the main characteristics of the educational contexts where these children are included. This document summarises major research and policy documents to analyse Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) services and programmes implemented for at-risk children and/or those with SEN. Chapter 2 introduces the definitions of the concepts that are the focus of study. Chapter 3 summarises the main documents published by international organisations and reviews the main EU policy developments related to ECE/IECE which define the context in this area. Chapter 4 reviews the latest literature describing the benefits of ECE/IECE for at-risk children and children with SEN. Chapters 5 to 10 describe relevant academic research, aiming to identify the main factors that are important in early years programmes. The key research is framed within the five principles identified by the European Commission's Thematic Working Group on ECEC (2014), namely: • Access/transition procedures • Workforce • Curriculum/content • Governance/funding • Monitoring/evaluation. ; peer-reviewed

Many children and young people in contemporary Europe are unfortunately coming to school carrying heavy social and emotional burdens, which are, of course, unfavourable to their learning and psychological wellbeing. Amongst the many challenges they may face that affect their education are: poverty and social inequality, bullying and cyberbullying, family conflict, consumerism, media exploitation and technological addiction, academic pressure and stress, loneliness and social isolation, migration, human trafficking, mobility, and changing family and community structures. Policymakers and educators across the world are increasingly coalescing around a specific approach to address these many challenges, namely, social and emotional education (SEE). SEE is intended for children to develop competences in both self-awareness and self-management, and to raise social awareness and improve the quality of their relationships. These competences combine to enhance their ability to understand themselves and others, to express and regulate their emotions, to develop healthy and caring relationships, to empathise and collaborate with others, to resolve conflict constructively, to enable them to make good, responsible and ethical decisions, and to overcome difficulties in social and academic tasks. Social and emotional education is something that can be offered by schools to all children, including those affected by the additional challenges arising from various forms of disadvantage. There is mounting evidence that social and emotional education is also related to positive academic attitudes and higher academic achievement, to increased prosocial behaviour, and to a decrease in anti-social behaviour, anxiety, depression and suicide. More broadly, it contributes to harmonious relationships, to social cohesion and inclusion in communities, to positive attitudes towards individual and cultural diversity, and to equity and social justice. In light of this, the objective of this report is to make recommendations — on the basis of international research, EU policy, and current practices in Member States — for the integration of social and emotional education as a core component of curricula across the EU. More specifically, the report seeks to: • Define and identify the key competences within social and emotional education; • Review the literature to assess the effectiveness of SEE across the school years and to identify key conditions for its effective integration into curricula; • Discuss how the universal provision of SEE may accommodate children and young people from different socio-economic, ethnic and cultural backgrounds; • Explore how SEE is integrated into the school curricula of Member States, and to identify examples of existing good practice from several countries; • Make recommendations at EU, national and school levels, for the effective, sustainable and feasible inclusion of SEE as a core feature of regular school curricula across the EU. ; peer-reviewed

A common theme among a number of the books reviewed in this issue is that of care and relationships as part of preparing future professionals, whether in the area of primary education, health and social care or youth work. Cefai & Cavioni's book is concerned with Social and Emotional Education (SEE) in primary schools, adopting a layered focus through a multi-component, multiintervention, multi-population and multi-year approach that is largely psychological in focus. Brotherton & Parker's book on education in health and social care takes a more sociological, social policy and political focus, while also seeking to address the needs of practitioners. Similarly Sapin's book, engaging with relationships as part of developing creativity and reflection in youth work settings, offers perspectives that are relevant across disciplines and professional domains. Gray & Webb's ambit of concern is with social work; they draw on a diverse and eclectic range of thinkers, mainly through a sociological and political theories lens. The commonality of themes, concerns and approaches, while obviously offering distinctive angles of specific concern as well, raise the issue as to how much current and future university courses across education, health and social care, social work and youth work could increasingly offer some similar joint modules as part of a broader multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approach – some disciplinary boundaries may need expansion to benefit from such crossfertilisation of ideas and approaches. It is increasingly evident in the education, health, social care, social work and youth work domains that no domain is an island. ; N/A

There seems to be a higher challenge today for teachers across Europe and the USA to respond to an increasing diversity of students. Responding to diversity implies understanding individual student characteristics and matching differentiated teaching within an inclusive atmosphere to enable everyone to participation actively in all classroom activities (see e.g., Gay, 2000). Student diversity is seen as arising from three main sources: (a) A cultural one due to the impact of an increasing number of immigrants and increasing mobility within and across countries. Recent EU reports note that "Teachers may be confronted with different cultures, religions, and languages in a single learning environment" (Eurydice, 2002, p.48); "Teachers/ trainers are faced with socially, culturally and ethnically diverse pupils/trainees and challenges them to deal with more and more heterogeneous classes" (EC Directorate General for Education and Culture 2003, 35). (b) Both the above reports add a second major factor: the policy of mainstreaming of students with impairments or special needs, which calls "for the acquisition by teachers of specific skills, such as the ability to offer teaching geared to individual needs and adapt the curriculum accordingly" (Eurydice 2002, 47). One may add to this the wider democratic concerns on the entitlement of each student to reach his or her potential, whether as gifted or as having a different learning style: "It is unacceptable for any teacher to respond to any group of children (or any individual child) as though the children were inappropriate, inconvenient, beyond hope, or not in need of focused attention" (Tomlinson 2001, 21). "The teacher . has to adapt or prepare the curriculum in such a way that the needs of all pupils, those with special educational needs, gifted pupils and their peers, are sufficiently met" (Meijer 2003, Para 3.2.2). (c) There is also a new concern about the difficulties that are faced in modern society by youths who fail to achieve adequate levels of literacy or drop out of school, together with an awareness of the multiplicity and complexity of competencies required in today's society (Gregory and Kuzmich 2005). This concern has been strong in Europe but is also a worldwide concern: In the learning society, social stratification is increasingly based on a division between the haves and have-nots in terms of skills and qualifications. Dropping out from school, therefore, has much more lasting consequences than it had in the past, since it can mark an individual for life and greatly narrow the range of career choices open to them. Schools are at the centre of the learning society and life-long learning begins there. (EC 2001, Sect. 4.5, see also Eurydice 1994, UNESCO 2004) ; peer-reviewed

Quality in early childhood education is a prominent concern for policy-makers, and has recently become a priority concern for many international and European organisations. These include the OECD, UNESCO, UNICEF, the European Commission, Eurydice and the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, among others. Over the past three years (2015–2017), the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (the Agency) has examined the latest policy documents and relevant research in this field. This has been a springboard for exploring the main characteristics of quality inclusive early childhood education (IECE) for all children from three years of age to the start of primary education. The project data from across Europe has provided an opportunity to closely examine how, within the inclusion perspective, early childhood education provisions are addressing the quality principles set out by the European Commission and the OECD. Sixty-four inclusive early childhood education experts from across Europe contributed to the project. They participated in data collection and analysis through descriptions of example provisions, as well as observations and discussions during field work and case study visits. This report first sets out the main policy and practice developments towards inclusive early childhood education, with particular reference to European policy issues (Chapters 2–3). It then presents the project's three new contributions towards improving quality inclusive early childhood education (Chapters 4–6). These are: 1. A clear rationale for and an analysis of the implications of adopting an inclusive vision and goals as the main standards of inclusive early childhood policy and provision. The project found that high-quality services that benefited all children were guided by an inclusive vision and worked towards inclusive goals. As their primary outcome, they sought to ensure each child's belongingness, engagement and learning. This reflects the changes in early childhood intervention in recent decades. The focus has shifted from 'working with the child' towards a holistic approach that creates an inclusive environment for all children's engagement and learning. The report thus refers to quality early childhood education (ECE) as 'inclusive early childhood education' (IECE). It only uses the terms 'early childhood education' (ECE) or 'early childhood education and care' (ECEC) when referring to the literature. 2. A new Self-Reflection Tool for improving inclusive early childhood education settings. This enables practitioners to review their service's quality in terms of the inclusiveness of the physical, social and other learning environments it offers to children and families. The tool has been validated by project experts and additional ecological studies. It is ready for use by practitioners in inclusive early childhood education settings in different education systems and countries across Europe and beyond. 3. A new Ecosystem Model of Inclusive Early Childhood Education for policy-makers and other stakeholders wishing to collaborate towards effective action in this field. This model can support policy-makers and practitioners to collaborate in planning, reviewing and improving quality IECE services. The model is founded on the project data. It is inspired by three major frameworks for quality IECE, namely: (1) The structure-process-outcome framework used by European and international policy-makers (European Commission, 2014; OECD, 2015; European Agency, 2009) (2) The ecological systems framework (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006) (3) The inclusive education perspective (European Agency, 2015). It incorporates all the principles of the EU and OECD frameworks for quality early childhood education. However, it enhances their applicability by locating them at different ecological levels (inclusive early childhood education setting, home/community and regional/national levels). Finally, the report gives an account of the lessons learned during the three-year project and the resulting recommendations (Chapter 7). These are presented within the framework of the new Ecosystem Model of IECE. They are mainly directed at policy- makers, but they also point to the implications for practitioners. Indeed, they are formulated in terms of how policy-makers can support practitioners to ensure quality provisions. ; peer-reviewed