Teachers’ Interpersonal Styles Toward Students with Special Educational Needs in Chinese Inclusive Classrooms

This study aims to develop and validate a questionnaire based on the model of interpersonal teacher behavior to assess teachers’ interpersonal styles with students with special educational needs (SEN) in inclusive education. The survey was administered to 1,695 regular education teachers in China. The findings of this study are that (1) Chinese teachers trained in inclusive education used interpersonal styles with students with SEN that were represented by a two-dimensional (control and affiliation) four-factor (understanding, support, indulgence, and conflict) model; (2) teachers perceived that they show high affiliation (understanding and support) and low control (indulgence and conflict) toward students with SEN; and (3) teachers’ interpersonal styles are affected by a series of factors: whether they are head teachers, their academic qualifications and the length of their inclusive education training, the grade level they teach, type of student disability, and class size. This study helps construct a conceptual framework and corresponding tools for inclusive education teachers in China to adapt their interpersonal styles. The theoretical and practical implications, limitations of the study, and suggestions for further research are discussed.

In the last years, as a consequence of inclusive policies, the number of children with special educational needs in Romanian primary classrooms has increased. In this context primary school teachers face numerous challenges when teaching children with special educational needs in their classrooms. It is assumed that regular education teachers are the critical agents in this process of inclusion. Their attitudes toward the inclusion of children with special educational needs in regular classrooms is especially important for the success of inclusionary efforts. Teacher self-efficacy has also an essential role when addressing diverse learners. In this study we examine the relationship between teacher self-efficacy and teacher attitudes toward the inclusive education. Data were collected from 126 Romanian in-service primary school teachers that have in their classrooms students with special educational needs. There is a significant positive correlation between primary school teachers’ perceived self-efficacy and their attitudes towards inclusive education. Younger primary school teachers have more positive attitudes towards children with special educational needs and inclusive education. Those primary school teachers that have attended more special education courses appear to have less positive attitudes and are less willing to accept students with disabilities in regular classrooms. Practical implications of teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy in inclusive classrooms are discussed.

The term children with special educational needs (SEN) refers to highly diverse populations of children with a wide range of physical, cognitive and socioemotional disabilities or difficulties as well as strengths and resources causing them to require varying degrees of special educational support and assistance (Squires, 2012; Vehmas, 2010; Wilson, 2002). Several studies document significant gender imbalances in the number of students who receive special educational support, and for most disability categories the prevalence is higher for boys (Skårbrevik, 2002). The reasons for these imbalances are likely complex, and it is beyond the scope of the present review to account for the hypotheses and findings associated with each disability category. However, a general hypothesis across different categories of special educational needs is the notion that special educational needs are more likely to remain undetected in girls as symptoms and problems in girls may be less visible to educators (Arms et al., 2008). Traditional special education consists of segregating students with special needs from mainstream students within separate and typically smaller classrooms or educational settings. However, as early as in the 1930s, a movement originally known as mainstreaming, and in more recent years as inclusion, has sought to bring an end to segregated placement as the preferred educational option for students with special needs (Carlberg & Kavale, 1980). In 1994, the idea of inclusive education became even more consolidated when the Salamanca Statement was adopted by representatives from 92 countries, resulting in an international shift in policy. This meant that far more students with special needs started entering general educational settings around the globe (Murawski & Lee Swanson, 2001; Ruijs & Peetsma, 2009). The terms inclusion, mainstreaming, integrated placement, and cross-categorical instruction all refer to educational settings with a group composition consisting of a mixture of students with and without special educational needs. In the present review, we have chosen to use the term inclusion to refer to general educational settings in which there is a mixture of students with and without special educational needs. Ideally, inclusion and inclusive education should be based on an educational approach in which the goal is to continuously address and respond to the diversity of needs of all learners through increasing participation and reducing exclusion within and from education. Inclusion thus may involve changes and modifications in content, approaches, structures and strategies, with a common vision which covers all children and a conviction that it is the responsibility of the regular system to educate all children. Inclusion emphasises the provision of opportunities for equal participation of children with disabilities (physical, social and/or emotional) whenever possible into general education, but leaves open the possibility of personal choice and options for special assistance and facilities for those who need it (UNESCO, 2005). Inclusion as an ideological and theoretical movement was built on a philosophical foundation but during the last 60 years, the number of empirical studies addressing inclusive education has grown tremendously. However, findings on the efficacy of inclusion on student outcomes are still far from unequivocal (Kavale & Forness, 2000; Lindsay, 2007; Ruijs & Peetsma, 2009). This is where the present review will contribute, as the aim of the review is to summarise contemporary evidence on the effects of inclusive education when compared to a traditional segregated approach on students' learning, socioemotional adjustment and well-being. It is important to consider the types of students who might benefit most from inclusive education. As stated earlier, it is possible that the effects of inclusive education may be different for girls and boys. Further, a child's cognitive and socioemotional skills and needs develop throughout childhood and adolescence (Lightfoot et al., 2009) and thus, it is possible that the potential benefits of inclusive education may vary depending on the age of the children. We plan to to explore the impact of these student characteristics on student outcomes. At the core of inclusion is the principle that students with special or additional learning needs or disabilities belong in mainstream education. The fundamental principle of inclusive education is that all children should learn together, regardless of any difficulties or differences (UNESCO, 2005; Winter & O'Raw, 2010). However, operationally within the present review, we define inclusion as an educational setting with a mixture of children with and without special educational needs. In the present review, the intervention termed inclusion may thus be defined as any given group composition within a general educational setting which contains at least one child with an identified special educational need. Based on the core principles of inclusion there are many ways in which inclusion may be practised and adjusted, and thus there are a large number of characteristics within the inclusive setting, which may vary across the included studies. We will review studies of all kinds of inclusive education meaning that placement in the inclusive setting may be full time or part time. Special education students are a diverse group, as outlined in Section 4.1.2, and we will review studies regardless of the type of special educational needs of the student population and regardless of the ratio of students with and without special needs within the inclusive setting. We will include studies in which the general education teachers are provided with support and continuing professional development aimed at helping the teachers accommodate the needs of special education students and studies of inclusive settings in which no such support is offered to the teachers. It is often referred to as coteaching when two or more professionals deliver substantive instruction to a diverse or blended group of students within the same physical space (Murawski & Lee Swanson, 2001). In the present review, we will include studies, in which special education teachers and/or teaching assistants are present within the general education setting (coteaching) and studies in which they are not. For physically disabled students there may be adjustments made to the inclusive educational setting in order to accommodate aids such as wheelchairs, and for dyslexic students a number of computer programmes may be available. We will review studies in which students with special needs are provided with any kind of aid and technological support. This list of possible variations in student and classroom characteristics is not exhaustive, and in summary, within the present review we will include studies of all kinds of inclusive education as long as the studies are aimed at exploring the effects of inclusion in comparison to segregated special educational settings. We plan to conduct moderator analyses to explore the impact of specific characteristics of the inclusive educational setting and the characteristics of special educational needs on student outcomes. Considering the rapid global development towards inclusive educational placement for students with special educational needs, there is a rather surprising lack of pedagogical, psychological, or didactic theories regarding the specific ways in which inclusive education may affect students with special needs' academic and socioemotional development. Group composition within the educational setting may play a significant role in determining the academic achievement, socioemotional development and overall wellbeing of special needs students. Theoretically and ideologically, scholars favouring mainstreaming or inclusion propose that segregated educational placement causes stigmatisation and social isolation which may have detrimental effects on the self-concept, social identity, and self-confidence of students with special educational needs (Dyssegaard & Larsen, 2013). Second, being placed in a general education classroom along with typically developing peers is proposed to benefit special needs students' academic growth through peer effects (Rea et al., 2002; Tremblay, 2013). Finally, it is hypothesised that social interaction with general education peers may provide developmental opportunities that are not present in smaller, specialised units (Fisher & Meyer, 2002). On the other hand, opponents of inclusive education for all special needs students suggest that placement in general education classrooms may have adverse effects for special needs children especially if the time and resources allocated for individualisation and differentiation are not aligned with student needs. In such cases, special needs students' learning opportunities and wellbeing may also suffer, resulting in damages to self-concept (Zeleke, 2004), social isolation or bullying (Monchy et al., 2004; Pijl et al., 2010), stress (Pitt & Curtin, 2004), negative self-perception, and lower self-confidence (Bakker et al., 2007; Ruijs & Peetsma, 2009). Hegarty (1993) provides a narrative review of the literature on inclusion and suggests that a number of factors are associated with positive student outcomes in inclusive settings. These are: (1) instruction based on student achievement needs, (2) materials and procedures that allow students to proceed at their own pace, (3) additional time for students who need it, (4) increased student responsibility for their own learning, (5) cooperation among students in achieving goals, (6) support teaching and (7) collaboration among special and general education teachers. In sum, the impact of inclusion on the academic achievement, socioemotional development, and wellbeing of students with special needs may be hypothesised to be both positive and negative, and the current knowledge base is rather unclear, leaving special educators and policymakers uncertain when making decisions on special education provision. Since the 1980s, a number of reviews on the impact of inclusion on students with special needs have been published (Madden & Slavin, 1983; Ottenbacher & Cooper, 1982; Wang & Baker, 1985; Hegarty, 1993). Results are equivocal, and several reviews point to a number of methodological challenges and weaknesses of the study designs within the included primary studies. In summary, most reviews suggest a neutral or small positive impact of inclusion on most outcomes. However, all reviews also point to the need to study the impact of potential moderators more thoroughly, as there may be several interaction effects between student and classroom characteristics, such as student disability category × proportion of students with disabilities within the classroom and disability category × presence of teaching assistants. Therefore, it is important to conduct the present review in order to explore the impact of potential moderators associated with student and classroom characteristics. In the following section we present the existing reviews and their main findings. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, which included 50 primary studies exploring the effects of special versus regular class placement for children with special needs, Carlberg and Kavale (1980) concluded that for students with special needs consisting of below average IQs, special classes were significantly inferior to regular classes on all outcome measures (separate analyses were carried out for achievement, social/personal and other measures). However, for students with behavioural disorders, emotional disturbances and learning disabilities (LDs), special classes were superior to regular classes. Madden and Slavin (1983) conducted a narrative review of the effects of mainstreaming/inclusion on students with mild academic disabilities. The review does not include a description of the search strategy for identifying records or the criteria used to determine eligibility for inclusion in the review. The review concludes that among methodologically adequate studies, findings indicate few benefits on academic and social outcomes of placement in full-time special education compared with part-time placement with resource support or full time regular class placement for students with mild academic disabilities. Ottenbacher and Cooper (1982) conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, which included 43 primary studies exploring the effects of class placement (special class, regular class and resource class defined as placement in regular education classroom with resource support and the possibility for part time segregated education) on the social adjustment of students with mild cognitive disabilities. The overall results suggest a very small effect in favour of special class placement over regular class placement. However, when special class placement was compared with resource class placement, results were insignificant but favouring resource class placement. Wang and Baker (1985) conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, which included 11 primary studies exploring the effects of mainstreaming/inclusion on children with special educational needs. In order to be eligible for inclusion in this review, primary studies needed to provide information on the effects of mainstreaming on students with special needs placed in a regular education setting. The studies had to use a control group consisting of special needs students with comparable impairment classifications placed in a segregated learning environment. The final selection of studies included 11 studies published between 1975 and 1984. The included studies used a wide variety of outcomes, but within the meta-analysis, outcomes were synthesised into three categories: performance, attitudinal, and process effects, and separate analyses were carried out for each of the three outcome categories. The study found small-to-moderate beneficial effects of inclusion on all outcomes with an overall mean weighted effect size across all studies and all three categories of outcomes of 0.33. Hegarty (1993) provides a narrative review of the literature on integration (inclusion) of students with different disabilities. The narrative review is based on a literature review which was commissioned by the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation under the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and was conducted by researchers in five different countries. The review does not include a description of the search strategies for identifying records or the criteria used to determine eligibility for the selected primary studies. Within the review, a number of factors which are associated with effective integration programmes are identified. Baker et al. (1994/1995) describe a review and meta-analysis by Baker et al. (1994/1995), which included 13 primary studies exploring the effects of inclusive placement on academic and social outcomes for students with special needs. We have been unable to retrieve the original publication, but according to Baker et al. (1994/1995), this study found a very small effect in favour of inclusive placement on academic outcomes (0.08) and a small to moderate effect on social outcomes (0.28). Sebba and Sachdev (1997) provide a review as part of a research report on what works for whom in inclusive education. The review does not include a description of the search strategy or the criteria for inclusion/exclusion of studies for the review. Within the research report, the authors suggest an overall positive impact of inclusive education and list a number of potential moderators such as attitudes of teachers and parents as well as a number of recommendations for the implementation of inclusive education. McGregor and Vogelsberg (1998) provide a narrative review of studies of both the effects of inclusive schooling on student outcomes and studies focusing on issues related to the implementation of inclusion. The review includes both quantitative and qualitative studies including case studies. Results are difficult to synthesise, but suggest an overall positive impact of inclusion based on the main findings: (1) students with disabilities demonstrate high levels of social interaction in settings with typically developing peers, but placement alone does not guarantee positive social outcomes; (2) interactive small group contexts facilitate skill acquisition and social acceptance; (3) friendships develop between students with disabilities and typically developing peers. Freeman and Alkin (2000) conducted a systematic narrative review in which it was concluded that on measures of academic achievement and social competence, children with mental retardation placed in general education perform better than children with mental retardation placed in special education classrooms. This review was only about children with mental retardation and did not include meta-analyses. Murawski and Lee Swanson (2001) conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis which included 6 studies exploring the effectiveness of coteaching on student outcomes of both general education students and students with special educational needs. Coteaching was defined as two or more professionals delivering substantive instruction to a diverse or blended group of students within a shared/common physical space, and thus in this review coteaching is a form of inclusion. The outcomes within the included studies were grades, achievement scores, social and attitudinal outcomes. The review found coteaching to be effective (average total effect size of 0.40). It is unclear what the control conditions within the included studies were and two of the included studies did not have a control group, but used a pre-test/post-test research design. Lindsay (2007) provides a narrative review of the effectiveness of inclusive education for students with special educational needs. The review provides a historical overview of the vast literature prior to 2000 and a search of studies published 2001–2005 in eight journals on special education. The search identified 1373 studies and points to the fact that only 1% of the identified papers were comparative outcome studies. The review concludes that there is a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of inclusion and argues that where evidence does exist, the balance is only marginally positive. Lindsay (2007) thus supports the need for an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of inclusion for students with special needs, with special attention to the potential impact of student and classroom moderators. In a systematic narrative review of the effects of inclusion on both learning and socioemotional outcomes of students with and without special needs, Ruijs and Peetsma (2009) point to mixed findings regarding the effects of inclusion on student outcomes and suggest a number of potential moderators. The authors conclude that there is a need for more research. This review has not been updated since publication and does not include meta-analyses. In 2009, a systematic review of evidence comparing the academic performance of students with special needs in different educational settings was carried out by the Canadian Council on Learning. The review included 30 primary studies. The search strategy for identifying studies was not described. The included studies examined students with LDs, intellectual disabilities, language impairments and mixed disabilities. The quality of each study was rated as either "high", "medium", or "low" based on criteria related to transparency and research design, and effect sizes were retrieved. No meta-analyses were carried out, but the authors provide tables illustrating the number of effect sizes for each disability category favouring either inclusive or segregated settings along with the quality ratings of the studies from which they were retrieved. The authors point to mixed findings but conclude that the balance of evidence shows favourable academic outcomes for students with special educational needs educated in inclusive settings, however they also note that results are not homogenous and that effects are generally small in magnitude.11 The review was retrieved 2.10.2019 from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519296.pdf. Dyssegaard and Larsen (2013) provide a systematic review and narrative synthesis on the effects of including children with special needs in mainstream teaching in primary and lower secondary school, and on which of the applied educational methods have proven to have a positive effect. The narrative synthesis is based on 43 studies of which 16 studies were deemed to have a "high level of evidence". The included studies consist of randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, cohort studies, longitudinal studies, and studies using a pre-test/post-test design. The systematic review included studies focusing on outcomes for both mainstream and special needs students and does not include a meta-analysis. The conclusion points to mixed findings regarding the overall effectiveness of inclusion on the academic achievement and psychosocial adjustment of special needs students and suggests that the effects may vary depending on the age of the child and the overall school and teacher attitudes towards inclusion. Furthermore, the review suggests that the effectiveness of coteaching may depend on the educational background and continuous professional development of both special and general education teachers and of teaching assistants. Carroll et al. (2017) provide a rapid evidence assessment of studies focused on approaches, strategies, and interventions supporting children and young people with special educational needs in mainstream schools. The rapid evidence assessment is based on a systematic search in a single database (ERIC) as well as a strategy of consulting experts within the relevant fields. The initial search identified 1046 papers of which 505 were later excluded due to low quality of evidence. The rapid evidence assessment points to a number of implementation strategies, pedagogical and didactic approaches which have shown positive results. Furthermore, the study points to evidence gaps and suggests the need for further research. The rapid evidence assessment does not include a meta-analysis. In the present review, besides being up to date, we will conduct an extensive risk of bias assessment of all included studies, and we will provide separate meta-analyses for each conceptual outcome (academic achievement, socioemotional development and wellbeing). Furthermore, we hope to be able to conduct moderator analyses based on the children's specific disability categories and the specific type of inclusion setting. This may shed further light on the initial differential findings from existing reviews. Traditional segregated special education is costly and in a time of increased interaction between special and general education systems and constraints on education spending, policymakers must consider the cost-efficiency of different special needs provisions. As more students with special educational needs enter general education settings, educators and policymakers must consider how the needs of these students are met in different settings and on what grounds placement in general or special educational settings should be determined. As previously noted, the current knowledge base is ambiguous with many findings suggesting a complex interplay between student and classroom characteristics (Carlberg & Kavale, 1980; Mesibov & Shea, 1996; Peetsma et al., 2001), leaving special educators and policymakers uncertain when making decisions on special education provision and highlighting the need for a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of inclusion on student outcomes. The objective of this systematic review is firstly: To uncover and synthesise data from studies to assess the effects of inclusion on measures of academic achievement, socioemotional development and wellbeing of children with special needs when compared to children with special needs who receive special education in a segregated setting. A secondary objective is to explore how potential moderators (gender, age, type of special need, part or full time inclusive education, and coteaching) affect the outcomes. The moderator analysis will be performed as outlined in Section 4.3.11. In order to summarise what is known about the causal effects of inclusion on student's academic achievement, socioemotional outcomes, and wellbeing in special education, we will include all studies with a well-defined control group. Thus, the study designs eligible for inclusion are: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (allocated at either the individual level or cluster level, e.g., class/school/geographical area etc.). Non-randomised studies (inclusion has occurred in the course of usual decisions, the allocation to inclusive and segregated special educational placement is not controlled by the and there is a comparison of two or more of at least a group and a control using a single group research will not be eligible for inclusion in the review. Non-randomised studies using an approach will not be the of exclusion of studies using an for for studies of these In order to the risk of bias in cluster randomised studies, we will study designs in which only one was to the intervention or control group. there must be at least two units in the intervention group and two units in the control group, as there is a risk of effects with effects this likely be In order to the of findings from the present review to current and we will search to studies published The for studies is as a number of systematic reviews and meta-analyses have synthesised the effects of inclusion based on studies published prior to Second, educational settings, pedagogical approaches and the development and of technological to support the educational needs of special needs children have changes throughout the two & and in order for the findings from the present review to be to the current within educational settings, we will review to the more recent findings. The review will include special needs children in to the in in special education in the defined as the countries. The reasons for focusing on the are we that the in which children with disabilities are within is which fundamental differences in the for children with disabilities around the globe et al., 2010; & 2013). Second, special education is costly and thus the resources for special educational support for children with special needs are often different between in the and the developing regarding the of what a special educational need Wilson, 2002). A used be found in the with in which special needs are into 13 different disability categories under which children are eligible for For more information on the disability of with These categories are: challenges related to a child's to or e.g., or impairment conditions a child's or e.g., e.g., and or language impairment difficulties with or e.g., language problems a child's to or impairment including and where a child most or all even with a impairment to a not by the of children from both and vision impairment when a child has problems with or as in the case of disability intellectual by or other kinds of physical disabilities with more than one by the However, the criteria are not to be as or as of what special educational needs but are rather as in the search for and of relevant studies. We that existing to define special educational needs, as in and are by a lack of which to be

INTERNET RESOURCES FOR SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS AND INCLUSION

Background: Zambia, like any other country that is concerned with the rights to education of all learners, has prioritized inclusive education. Inclusive education is a fundamental right recognized by national and international policies. For example, Article 69 of the United Nations (2016) General Comment CRPD/C/GC/4 stresses the need for inclusive teacher education across all educational levels. In this context, our study investigated secondary school science teachers’ sources of knowledge about inclusion and explored the lived experiences of learners with special education needs in an inclusive setup in Kitwe district, Zambia. Specifically, the study explored secondary school science teachers’ sources of knowledge about inclusion and the lived experiences of some learners with Special Education Needs (SEN) in expanding their capabilities in an inclusive setup in Kitwe district, Zambia. Methods: A qualitative case study design was employed, involving 12 participants: six science teachers and six learners with special education needs. These participants were purposively selected from three secondary schools recognized as successful inclusive schools in Kitwe district, located in the Copperbelt Province of Zambia. Data collection methods included semi-structured interviews and open-ended questionnaires. Thematic analysis was applied to analyse the collected data. Findings: The study indicates that teachers’ main sources of knowledge about inclusive education include pre-service training and in-service training through Continuous Professional Development (CPDs), seminars and workshops, literature, internet, and knowledge from other people through research. Further, the study indicated that most learners with Special Educational Needs (SEN) were determined, strong, full of self-esteem and resilient because of some positive attitudes and help they were receiving from some teachers and fellow pupils. However, they were constrained by their families’ economic and financial status and the school environments, among them. As such, learners were not availed with complete freedom to make meaningful choices due to the above structural challenges which would not help to boost their capabilities. These findings underscore the need for deliberate programs to enhance the practical application of inclusive education principles both at school and the entire community. Conclusion: Drawing from the study’s insights, the following conclusions can be drawn; secondary school science teachers’ main sources of knowledge about inclusive education include pre-service training and in-service training through CPDs, seminars and workshops, including literature, internet, and knowledge from other people through research. Economic and financial status and the school environment are among the constraints that make it difficult for learners with special education needs to realise their full potential in an inclusive setting. Our findings highlight the importance of deliberate programs to apply inclusive education principles both at home and in schools. The study, therefore, recommends collaborations between the schools and stakeholders, including the communities as being crucial to realizing the full potential of learners with special educational needs in inclusive settings.

Teachers’ interpersonal styles and students’ school adjustment are important for the academic performance of students with special education needs (SEN). This study aimed to develop an instrument to measure the school adjustment of students with SEN and investigate its mediating role in the relationship between teachers’ interpersonal styles and students’ academic performance. Six hundred and twenty-five valid questionnaires were collected from inclusive primary and junior high school teachers in China. The findings suggested that the four-factor model of school adjustment (i.e. behavioural, emotional, peer, and learning adjustment) showed good reliability and validity. Teachers’ positive interpersonal styles positively predicted students’ school adjustment and academic performance, and negative interpersonal styles negatively predicted students’ school adjustment. School adjustment positively predicted academic performance. Furthermore, school adjustment partially mediated the effect of teachers’ positive interpersonal styles on academic performance.

This study aimed to determine the level of readiness of regular teachers for the inclusion of learners with special education needs. The researcher used total population sampling to determine the study respondents. This study used the descriptive-survey method. Regular teachers were asked about their readiness to include learners with special education needs through a questionnaire with age, gender, years of teaching, and attendance at seminars as moderator variables. There were 140 items in the questionnaire and 20 items per parameter. The statistical treatment used in the study were mean and SD. The study showed that regular teachers in the Loreto district were highly prepared for inclusive education. As a result of the study, AIM, which stands for Alliance in Inclusion Movement, was developed and proposed to assist regular teachers in improving their readiness level to include learners with special education needs. Pre-service and in-service training about inclusive education was highly recommended for regular teachers. A thorough program on monitoring and evaluation by the National and Division DepEd Officials must be conducted to examine the practice of inclusive education in the country, especially in areas with no SPED Center.

BackgroundThe trial will study the effects of the Whole School SEND Review on secondary school pupils in English mainstream education, to understand the impact of the intervention on academic attainment, wellbeing, and school attendance. The Review is designed to facilitate whole-school change through providing enhanced, intensive and sustained support and training in inclusive education for school special educational needs coordinators and leadership teams. The trial will have a specific focus on pupils designated as having special educational needs or disabilities.MethodsWe recruited 160 English secondary schools (approx. 58,000 pupils across two cohorts) to a two-arm pragmatic parallel cluster randomised controlled trial, with allocation at the school level. Randomisation will be stratified by school region. The primary outcome is attainment in English language (using standardised national test results at 16 years) for pupils designated as having a special educational need (approx. 4000 pupils). Secondary outcomes will be measured for pupils both with and without a special educational need designation and include pupil wellbeing (measured using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire), absences and exclusions, and attainment in Mathematics and English language at 16 years. The intervention will be implemented from July 2021 and analysis of outcomes (for the year 9 cohort) will take place in September 2023, with further analysis (for the year 8 cohort) in September 2024 if the evaluation shows that acceptable implementation fidelity has been achieved.DiscussionPupils with special educational needs represent a significant and often vulnerable part of the secondary school population, are disproportionately likely to be excluded from school, eligible for free school meals, or supported by children’s social care. Despite these multiple important areas of need, school leaders report substantial challenges in making additional provision for this group. Previous research has highlighted the development of inclusive school cultures (rather focusing primarily on targeted individualised approaches) as being important. This trial will investigate how an intervention designed to drive whole school change may lead to outcomes for pupils with and without a special educational needs designation. As such, this trial is expected to make an important contribution to research evidence and to UK educational policy.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN11339306. Registered on 12 March 2020 (retrospectively registered).

This study examined the extensiveness of school committees in maintaining infrastructure to improve access to education for pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN) in public primary schools in Mvomero District, Tanzania. It adopted a convergent mixed-methods design underpinned by Social Theory, involving 15 schools, 15 head teachers, 99 pupils, 158 teachers, and 136 school committee members. Data were collected through questionnaires, interviews, observations, and focus group discussions. Validity was ensured by MWECAU experts, while reliability was confirmed with Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.931 (teachers) and 0.914 (committee members). Trustworthiness of qualitative data was achieved through triangulation. Analysis employed SPSS for descriptive statistics and thematic analysis for qualitative data. Ethical standards were observed through permits, anonymity, confidentiality, and informed consent. Findings revealed that committees maintained ramps and handrails, inspected infrastructure, allocated resources, and collaborated with parents. The study concluded that committees effectively maintained infrastructure, enhancing SEN access, and recommended continuous training in inclusive education and infrastructure standards.

This article analyzes the main challenges faced by students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) in the context of digital education in rural areas of Ecuador. Through a systematic literature review using the PRISMA approach, structural, pedagogical, and technological barriers are identified that limit equitable access to inclusive, quality education. Among the most relevant findings are poor teacher training, a lack of curricular adaptation, limited technological infrastructure, and limited internet access in rural communities. Furthermore, cases of bullying toward students with SEN and weak implementation of inclusive public policies are evident. The study highlights the need to strengthen teacher training in inclusive education, promote digital literacy, ensure connectivity, and adapt pedagogical strategies to individual needs. It concludes that true educational inclusion in rural settings requires the joint commitment of the State, educational institutions, and the community to close inequality gaps and guarantee the right to education for all.

This study reports the development and validation of a questionnaire to assess the holistic development of students with special educational needs (SEN) as a reliable instrument for measuring their overall performance in inclusive education. The survey was administered to 981 regular education teachers in Beijing. The identified factor structure contained six dimensions: Academic Performance (AP), School Adaptive Skills (SAS), Social Rules (SR), Motor Ability (MA), Interpersonal Relationships (IR), and Behaviour Management (BM). The data showed that students with SEN gained in the IR, SAS, SR and BM domains. These domains are more closely related to social and life skills than AP, which received the lowest scores. Student development in different domains varied depending on demographic variables, including student characteristics, learning environment and regular education teachers. The findings suggest that teachers prioritise the abilities of students with SEN to adapt to ‘learning’ and ‘life’ in inclusive schools. The presence of students with SEN in inclusive schools is a longstanding challenge facing Chinese inclusive education. There remains a long way to go to realise the goal of equitable and appropriate education for all. Continuous reform should be strengthened to support a more equitable education system with increased training and support for inclusive schools in China.

This paper examines the extent to which initial teacher education (ITE) programmes contribute to the development of inclusive attitudes, values and practices. Inclusive education is the entitlement of all children and young people to quality education, irrespective of their differences or dispositions. It is about embracing educational values of equity, diversity and social justice. The data which underpins this paper was obtained through research commissioned by the Department of Education (DE) Northern Ireland (NI) which sought to identify existing practices that increased the motivation, participation and achievement of all pupils of school age with special educational needs (Moran & Abbott, 2006). Head teachers and Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCOs) views were sought on the effectiveness of ITE programmes in preparing student teachers to work in inclusive school settings. Cet article considère jusqu'à quel point les programmes de formation pédagogique initiale (ITE) contribuent au développement d'attitudes, de valeurs et de pratiques inclusives. Tous les enfants et les jeunes ont le droit à un enseignement de bonne qualite sans tenir compte de leurs différences, de leurs tendances ou de leurs infirmités. Il s'agit d'embrasser les valeurs éducatives de l'équité, de la diversité et de la justice sociale. Les données qui sont à la base de cet article ont été obtenues à partir de recherche commandée par le ministre de l'Education (DE) pour l'Irlande du Nord (NI) qui cherchait à identifier les pratiques actuelles qui ont augmenté la motivation, la participation et la performance de tous ceux qui ont des difficultés d'apprentissage scolaire (Moran & Abbott, 2006). On a demandé les opinions de Directeurs et de Coordinateurs pour l'enseignement spécialisé sur l'efficacité des programmes de formation pédagogique initiale (ITE) à préparer les enseignants stagiaires à travailler dans des établissements d'enseignement inclusif. Este documento examina el punto hasta el que los programas iniciales de formación pedagógica contribuyan al desarrollo de actitudes, valores y prácticas inclusives. Todos los niños y los jóvenes tienen derecho a la enseñanza inclusive, o sea, de buena calidad, sin distinción de diferencia, temperamento ni discapacidad. Se trata de dedicarse a valores educativos de equidad, diversidad y justicia social. Los datos que respaldan este documento fueron obtenidos por medio de investigaciones encargadas por el Ministerio de Educación de Irlanda del Norte. Este pensó identificar prácticas actuales que aumentaran la motivación, la participación y el rendimiento de todos los alumnos de edad escolar que requirieran una educación especial (Moran & Abbott, 2006). Solicitaron las opiniones de los directores y de coordinadores de la educación especial respecto a la eficacia de los programas iniciales de formación pedagógica en lo que se refiere a preparar a los estudiantes de magisterio para trabajar en colegios con ambiente inclusive. Dieses referat untersucht, inwieweit die ersten Lehrerausbildungsprogramme (ITE) zur Entwicklung von inklusiven Einstellungen, Werten und Praktiken beitragen. Inklusive Ausbildung bedeutet die Berechtigung aller Kinder und Jugendlicher zu einer erstklassigen Ausbildung, ungeachtet ihrer Unterschiede, Veranlagungen oder Behinderungen. Es geht um die Wahrnehmung der erzieherischen Werte von Fairness, Vielfalt und sozialer Gerechtigkeit. Die Daten in diesem Referat wurden anhand von Forschung im Auftrag des Kulturministeriums Nordirland (DENI) erworben, die versuchte, die bestehenden Verfahrensweisen zu identifizieren, welche die Motivation, Teilnahme und Leistungen aller schulpflichtigen Kinder mit besonderen schulischen Bedürfnissen förderten (Moran & Abbott, 2006). Schulleiter und Koordinatoren von Besonderen Schulischen Bedürfnissen (SENCOS) wurden befragt im Hinblick auf die Wirksamkeit von ITE‐Programmen, Referendare auf die Arbeit in inklusiven Schulumgebungen vorzubereiten.

Inclusive education (IE) is underpinned by the values of equality, participation, developing and sustaining communities, and respect for diversity. It was asserted that through social participation in ordinary education settings, students with special educational needs (SEN) would benefit in academic performance and psychosocial adjustment. However, students with SEN in IE not only were poor in self-image, but also showed negative social relationships. Research in the West suggested that the efficacy of IE depends partly on the attitudes of teachers and students. This study was conducted to investigate the core value, attitude and sentiments regarding IE among students and teachers in Hong Kong. A questionnaire comprising items on sociodemographic characteristics and measuring instruments was designed for data collection. Participation was voluntarily and anonymous. A total of 107 teachers, 91 students with SEN, and 458 students without SEN in an institute of higher education responded to the online questionnaire survey. The data revealed that teachers and students with and without SEN were generally supportive of the core values of IE. In general, negative sentiments about people with disability were low and attitudes towards IE was positive among the three groups of respondents. Teachers obtained the lowest score on attitudes towards IE, though they were less negative in sentiments about people with disability. Expectedly, students with mild disabilities were considered more suitable for IE than students with more severe disabilities. Regardless of severity of disabilities, intellectual disabilities, mental and emotional problems, and ADHD were more commonly considered not suitable for IE. Ironically, mental and emotional problems and ADHD were the most common disabilities among students with SEN. Implications of the findings were considered.

The article substantiates the relevance of the study of the problem of personal and professional self-determination of high school students with special educational needs. The degree of elaboration of the problem is analyzed, the results of research of the problem of professional self – determination of senior pupils in the conditions of inclusive education are presented. The aim of the article is to study the psychological features of the choice of profession by high school students with special educational needs. Research methods: theoretical – analysis of psychological and pedagogical sources on the researched problems, generalization and systematization of data on the choice of profession of high school students with special educational needs; empirical – the method «Motives for choosing a profession», «Questionnaire to identify the readiness of students to choose a profession» (VB Uspensky) and the method «Readiness to choose a profession» (adaptation of AP Chernyavskaya). The study involved 25 high school students with special educational needs and 25 high school students who do not have health problems. The results of the study showed that high school students with special educational needs who study in an inclusive education have a well-developed need to choose a profession. Characteristically, most of them have a clear idea that they are going to realize their potential in the professional sphere. Professional self-determination of children with special educational needs should be carried out comprehensively, involving various specialists and parents in this process. It is necessary to adjust the professional plans of high school students with special educational needs according to their abilities throughout the career guidance period. The task of the career counselor is to establish the most appropriate for people with special educational needs types of work corresponding to their knowledge and skills. Career guidance should take into account the personal wishes of each person and be based on the most careful assessment of professional aptitudes and, of course, the medical diagnosis of the subject of professional choice.

Even though the Korean experience with special education in the public education system is limited, inclusive education for special education needs (SEN) students has been at the center of attention at the national policy level since the mid‐1990s. Since then, Korean educators and administrators have put an emphasis on the revision and regulation of special education policies, guaranteeing the rights of SEN students to learn, and fostering the quality of teachers to strengthen inclusive education. These efforts have led to progress supporting inclusive education. However, there is still much to be achieved. The author examined the current practices and policies of inclusive education and the challenges to implementing successful inclusive education in Korea and found that what is needed is to transform the existing climate of the schools from being competition‐driven to being more cooperative and human‐centered. We need strong leadership from principals and administrators. The Korean process also needs to implement disability awareness programs at the national level in order to improve social perceptions. There is a need for closer collaboration and a stronger partnerships between regular and special education teachers. Teachers need to adopt a positive attitude and perception toward SEN students, and to achieve this, there is a need to provide preservice and in‐service education to promote among teachers the notions inherent to inclusive education. The challenges are long standing complicated issues with respect to the practice of inclusion in Korea. Many of these challenges at times appear almost impossible to resolve. However, every year, more SEN students want to participate in inclusive education and both regular and special education teachers, together with administrators and parents, believe inclusive education is a worthwhile ideal for the education of SEN students.