Including children w/Down
syndrome
(Part 1/2)
Sue Buckley
and Gillian Bird
The
Down Syndrome Educational
Trust, Portsmouth, UK
The
first part of a two part
series on successful inclusion
in mainstream education.
The next part will appear
in the next issue of Down
Syndrome News and Update.
Abstract
- This article provides
guidelines to good practice
in developing the inclusive
school, considering the
importance of the role
of the Headteacher and
managers in developing
school philosophy, values
and culture, school organisation,
staff training and the
management of resources.
We then consider the role
of the teacher in developing
inclusive classrooms and
finally the role of all
the pupils in developing
peer support.
Keywords
- Down Syndrome, Education,
Inclusion, Schools, Teachers,
School Culture, Resources
Getting the culture right
Why inclusion?
Why
should you, as a headteacher,
school governor, teacher
or parent, be concerned
about how well your school
is meeting the needs of
children with significant
special educational needs?
Firstly,
because the evidence is
that the individual schools
who are the most successful
at including and educating
these children are also
the best schools for all
the other children in
them (1).
Secondly,
where whole education
systems have shifted to
be fully inclusive and
to provide for all children
within mainstream schools,
they report that the quality
of education has improved
over time for all children
(2).
The
implication of these statements
is that if we want our
schools to provide the
best possible education
for all our children we
need to explore what makes
the inclusion of children
with significant special
educational needs successful.
We also need to ask why
mainstream school systems
improve when changing
to successfully meet the
challenge of educating
these children.
The
first part of the article
provides guidelines to
good practice in developing
the inclusive school,
considering the importance
of the role of the Headteacher
and managers in developing
school philosophy, values
and culture, school organisation,
staff training and the
management of resources.
We then consider the role
of the teacher in developing
inclusive classrooms and
finally the role of all
the pupils in developing
peer support.
Developing inclusive schools
For
us, the opportunity to
go to a school in the
community in which you
live, with the other children
who live in your neighbourhood,
regardless of disability
or special educational
need is a human rights
issue. We do not expect
all readers to agree with
us but we do hope that
this article will challenge
some of the current assumptions
about the roles of schools
in our society and that
it will provoke discussion
with your staff and colleagues.
In
this article we will explore
these issues, sharing
the experiences that we
have gained from developing
inclusive placements for
children with Down syndrome
in the UK over the last
ten years - children who
would otherwise have been
placed in special schools.
During this time we have
learned a great deal about
the school factors which
lead to success or failure.
With other colleagues
in The Sarah Duffen Centre
and in the Department
of Psychology, University
of Portsmouth, we have
also been studying the
cognitive, social and
behavioural progress of
these children in inclusive
placements in some detail.
This work has relevance
to a wide range of children
and will be reviewed in
part 2 of this article.
We
are psychologists specialising
in working with children
with moderate to severe
learning difficulties
and between us we have
some 45 years of experience.
However, until we became
involved in the implementation
of the 1981 Act in the
late 80's, all our experience
had been in special education
settings.
Promoting mainstreaming
The
last ten years have been
the most rewarding and
exciting of our careers.
We have been most impressed
by the ways in which children
with Down syndrome and
significant special needs
have been welcomed in
the majority of mainstream
schools and by the skills,
enthusiasm and professionalism
of the majority of mainstream
teachers with whom we
have worked. We have seen
successful placements
and great progress for
the majority of the children
during most of their school
years. Some have had good
and bad experiences as
they have moved up the
school and we will return
to the reasons for this
later in the article.
We
have been involved in
the direct support of
many individual children
from the start of their
school careers through
to secondary school. We
have also provided INSET
training around the country
and offered advice on
individual placements
at particular points in
time. Much of the content
of this article draws
on our extensive opportunities
to learn alongside the
teachers who are successfully
including and educating
children with significant
learning difficulties
or disabilities in their
classrooms (3).
At
the start of our involvement
with mainstreaming, we
made links with research
groups and education programmes
in other countries in
order to learn from their
experience. We are confident
that our experience is
valid as success or failure
in our placements has
been the result of the
same criteria reported
by others in places where
they are further down
the road towards fully
inclusive education systems.
We
use the term mainstreaming
deliberately to describe
our early experience.
When we began to ask schools
to accept a child with
severe learning difficulties
in their school, we were
asking them to take a
child with the support
of an untrained Learning
Support Assistant (Learning
Support Assistant) into
the regular classroom
environment with little
or no preparation. The
teacher had to try to
meet this child's needs
without time to think
about changing the classroom
environment or teaching
styles or to learn new
skills. This is what our
American colleagues in
Madison, Wisconsin call
the "dump and hope"
phase! In Madison they
closed their last segregated
special school site in
1976 (4) so they have
more than twenty tears
of experience to draw
on.
Moving to inclusion
Inclusion
is more than mainstreaming.
It is the result of rethinking
the role of education
and usually requires a
change in school and classroom
culture and organisation.
Over
time we have seen a shift
in the UK towards the
development of inclusive
school cultures but this
is still mostly because
individual schools have
developed their skills
and changed their beliefs
about the role of schools.
It is rarely the result
of planning for an inclusive
system by Local Educational
Authorities. In these
inclusive schools there
is more awareness of the
individual needs of all
children, more flexibility
in the curriculum and
a valuing of diversity.
This shift has been particularly
noticeable over the last
few years, since the establishment
of Special Educational
Needs Co-ordinator's and
the implementation of
the Code of Practice,
following the special
needs legislation in the
1993 Education Act.
There
are very few UK Education
Authorities that have
actually embraced an inclusive
philosophy and actively
managed change. The London
Borough of Newham is one
example where an inclusive
policy is in place. It
has received much of its
impetus from effective
lobbying by parents of
children with disabilities
and special educational
needs. The Wisconsin changes
were also driven by parent
pressure in the early
years. In both the Newham
and the Wisconsin situations,
change has progressed
in the same way. Both
replaced segregated special
schools with special units
or special resources on
some mainstream sites.
Both found that these
could be phased out over
time as all teachers increased
their range of skills
and all schools became
more confident at meeting
a variety of needs. The
specialist skills of the
teachers who used to work
only on segregated sites
become available to all
children in the system
and to colleagues and
this helps the process
of change as well as benefiting
many more children.
Whole school issues and
the role of the headteacher
School philosophy and
culture
The
schools that we would
rate as the most successful
have established an inclusive
culture. They have thought
about and explicitly embraced
a philosophy that values
all children equally and
celebrates the diversity
of the human population.
They believe that the
role of education is broad
and would accept Lou Brown's
definition that it is
the task of schools "to
prepare children to live,
work and play in an inclusive
society". (Lou Brown
is the Professor of Special
Education, University
of Wisconsin, Madison(3)).
Schools as agents of change
A
school has the opportunity
to establish a community
that demonstrates the
values that we might wish
to see expressed in the
wider society outside
school.
We
can use the example of
disability to explore
this argument further.
It is common for adults
with disabilities to observe
that their lives are far
more restricted by the
attitudes of the non-disabled
majority towards them
than by the limits actually
imposed by their disability.
One reason for this may
be the lack of contact
with people with disabilities
that most of the non-disabled
population have as a result
of mainly segregated schooling
and segregated services
for children and adults
with disabilities. This
has lead to a society
where the majority of
individuals do not understand
the needs of people with
disabilities nor feel
at ease in relating to
or working with them.
The
decisions that are made
about the design of our
schools, work places,
transport and communication
facilities take little
account of the needs of
those with physical or
sensory impairments. Access
to the daily opportunities
that the rest of us take
for granted is therefore
denied to most children
and adults with disabilities.
Until recently, all children
with identifiable disabilities
experienced this lack
of access from earliest
childhood, when they were
denied the opportunity
to benefit from the same
educational experiences
as other children. This
resulted in two main disadvantages
- a restricted access
to the curriculum and
no opportunity to be part
of the ordinary social
world of childhood. In
other words, most children
with disabilities experienced
both social and educational
deprivation during childhood,
leading to social isolation,
under achievement and
impoverished lives as
adults.
If
all children are able
to grow and learn together,
the child with special
needs has the optimal
opportunity to reach his
or her potential, to make
friends and to become
fully integrated into
mainstream society.
The
other children have the
opportunity to learn to
understand the effects
of disability and to learn
how to care for and support
children with a variety
of needs. They will learn
that all children with
disabilities are children
first, with the same psychological,
emotional and social needs
as all other children.
Like the rest of us, significant
relationships with others
are central to their well-being
as children and adults
and the opportunity to
establish and maintain
friendships during childhood
is important preparation
for successfully developing
these relationships in
adult life. The non-disabled
students will become better
friends, neighbours, workmates
and bosses for people
with disabilities in their
adult lives.
This
may require schools to
recognise that social
development should be
an explicit part of the
curriculum, giving children
the opportunity to think
about friendships, loneliness
and social isolation (5).
The
experience of communities
who have had fully inclusive
education systems for
a generation is that these
gains do occur. Attitudes
do change throughout the
community and opportunities
become more equal. More
young adults with significant
disabilities are able
to work, live independently,
establish their own families
and enjoy the same leisure
facilities as everyone
else. More of the young
adults who, though not
disabled, were in the
less able third of the
mainstream school population
in terms of academic progress,
also do better in these
inclusive school systems.
The
skills developed by all
teachers as they are required
to meet the educational
needs of those with the
most significant difficulties
benefit many others who
have always been in the
mainstream but not always
had their needs met. Teachers
learn how to address social
and behavioural needs
more effectively and to
extend access to the curriculum
to a wider range of children.
However,
these benefits will only
be the outcome if inclusion
is done well.
The
individual educational
needs of all children
must be met as well as
they would be in separate
facilities. Mixing with
children with significant
disabilities can result
in other children becoming
less tolerant and sympathetic
if the experience is unpleasant
for any reason, so how
do we move forward successfully?
Strategies for success
Valuing diversity and
building self-esteem
The
successful schools see
all their pupils as individuals
and value them equally.
They encourage their students
to recognise that we are
all individuals and to
recognise that we all
have strengths and weaknesses.
Healthy
adjustment in adult life
is likely to come from
a realistic appraisal
of oneself, therefore
setting goals that are
achievable and appropriate
and which lead to a positive
self concept - feeling
good about oneself. Building
positive self-esteem in
all pupils should be a
primary goal for all teachers
(6). This is no easy task.
It means helping all students
to identify their strengths
and their limitations
so that they choose to
develop their strengths.
It
means that those schools
with authoritarian cultures
need to change, and that
ridicule and humiliation
of children should have
no part in the school
culture or in any teacher's
repertoire. One of us
(SB) has had the opportunity
to travel extensively
and experience the atmosphere
in schools where building
self-esteem is a primary
goal. We do experience
this in some of our UK
schools, but not to the
extent that is common
in parts of North America
and Canada.
Our
experience in the UK is
that the culture and philosophy
in schools can be very
different, even in neighbouring
schools. We can illustrate
this with a real example.
The student's name has
been changed to preserve
confidentiality in this
and later case examples.
Several
years ago one of us (SB)
received a phone-call
from a distressed parent,
asking if one of us could
attend a review meeting
with her and her husband,
as she feared that the
school no longer wanted
her daughter as a pupil.
Her daughter Sally was
13 years old and had Down
syndrome. She had received
all her education to that
time in mainstream school
with full time non-teaching
support provided. She
was nearing the end of
her second year in secondary
education and the school
were expressing considerable
concern about her progress
both educationally and
socially.
SB
arranged to arrive at
the school in time to
meet Sally and to talk
with the staff before
the review meeting. It
was quickly apparent that
the staff had no positive
commitment to meeting
this student's needs.
The Head of Learning Support
made clear to SB that
she and her staff did
not have the time to differentiate
work for Sally, seeing
this an inappropriate
use of their time. They
were also concerned that
she was becoming increasingly
socially isolated. They
did not want advice from
us on how they could change
this state of affairs
and make the placement
successful. This would
of course mean accepting
that the school might
be failing Sally. Their
perception of the situation
was that Sally should
not be in their school.
All the difficulties they
were experiencing were
the result of her disability
and she should be in a
special school. They even
expressed negative views
about her in her presence
and seemed to have no
sensitivity to the probable
effect of their attitudes
towards her on her progress
or happiness within the
school.
The
review meeting was a formal
affair involving the Headteacher,
Head of Learning Support
and five other professionals
from local and county
LEA's and chaired by the
Deputy Head. The Head
was visibly annoyed by
SB's presence and did
his best to prevent her
from contributing to the
discussion. The meeting
had clearly been called
with one aim - to agree
to remove Sally from the
school and put her where
this Head made plain he
thought that she belonged
- in a school for children
with severe learning difficulties.
He seemed to have little
understanding of the social
influences on any child's
performance and progress.
He saw Sally's present
difficulties in his school
as entirely her problem,
the result of her disability.
He certainly did not want
any advice. For him, the
last straw was when SB
secured the agreement
of the LEA to continue
to the same level of Learning
Support Assistant support
for Sally if we found
her another mainstream
placement as this clearly
implied that she believed
this school was failing
Sally.
With
Sally's parents, SB approached
another mainstream school
near her home. This school
expressed a willingness
to accept her and a visit
was arranged. The contrast
in the two school's philosophies
and cultures was extreme.
The Headteacher of the
new school greeted SB
warmly and informed her
that he would be delighted
to accept Sally in his
school. He explained that
this was a community school
- in name and in philosophy.
He wanted all the children
in the neighbourhood to
be welcome in his school
and had been developing
his learning support resources
accordingly, since coming
to the school as Head
four years earlier. He
then took SB to meet the
Head of Learner Support.
She explained that she
had no previous experience
of teaching a child with
Down syndrome but that
she had given some thought
to our request and was
looking forward to supporting
Sally in the school. She
added that she had considered
what she would have wanted
if Sally had been her
daughter and knew that
she would have wanted
an education with mainstream
peers within her own community
for her.
At
this point SB knew that
this placement was going
to be a success. She was
then asked about Sally's
achievements in literacy
and numeracy and was told
that there were other
students of her age working
at the same level so she
could join their groups.
The Head then asked SB
what year group Sally
should join. SB said that
she was unsure as Sally
was probably less socially
and emotionally mature
than other girls of her
age. The Head laughed
and said that some girls
of her age were more like
18 year olds in social
and emotional development,
others more like 9 year
olds - he felt sure she
would be fine in her correct
year group!
At
this time, we had little
experience of secondary
schools and this case
made us feel that we were
on a steep learning curve!
SB was quite shaken by
the contrast in the attitudes
and beliefs of the two
headteachers and their
staff. One school had
told her that Sally could
never fit in, as she was
so different from their
other pupils. Another
school just down the road
had no problem seeing
Sally as happily fitting
in to their school community
and pointing out that
her needs were not different
from those of some of
the other mainstream pupils
in the school, either
academically or socially.
Could the populations
of children in the two
schools really be that
different or was it the
way the staff perceived
their children that was
different?
The
evidence on the school
intakes supported the
latter view. We cannot
help worrying about the
educational experience
of many of the other children
in the first school, not
just those less academically
able, but also those with
social and emotional needs.
In both these schools
it seemed that the Headteacher
was determining the culture
and values of the whole
school, for good or ill.
We
would ask all Heads and
managers to reflect on
their own personal attitudes
to disability and to children
with special needs. It
is likely that your personal
attitudes and your emotional
reactions to disability
will be influencing the
decisions that you are
making and will be apparent
to your staff and to your
pupils. You might also
reflect on what educational
and social opportunities
you would want for your
own child, if you had
a child with a disability.
Staff attitudes
In
our experience, the single
most important predictor
of success for placements
is staff attitude. If
the staff believe that
the child is appropriately
placed in their school,
the placement will be
a success. We have seen
very disabled children,
with significant dependency
needs, flourish in schools
were they are wanted.
We have seen children
with obvious disabilities
but academic progress
within the norms for their
age, fail in schools that
do not want them - or
should we say failed by
schools that do not want
them.
The
evidence in favour of
the importance of staff
attitude is particularly
striking when a pupil
flourishes in one school
but has a miserable time
in the next school.
We
have had this experience
with several children
whom we know well. One
young friend of ours,
Gerry, is now 11 years
old. Gerry has Down syndrome.
He went to the same mainstream
nursery as his brother
and then into the infant
school where he made extremely
good progress. The school
had given much thought
to meeting his needs and
the staff were rightly
proud of his achievements.
In
Gerry's last year in this
school, his class teacher
was sharing her experiences
at a training day at our
Centre. She described
how, as Gerry's strengths
were his literacy skills
and his computer skills,
he was spending some time
each week helping children
in the reception class
and in Year 1, listening
to them read and showing
them how to use the computer.
This teacher had deliberately
constructed opportunities
to build Gerry's self-confidence
and self-esteem. These
situations also showed
the other children that,
despite his disability,
Gerry had strengths and
could help others as well
as benefit from their
help at other times. His
literacy skills were within
the range of his classmates.
Imagine
our concern when he moves
to the junior school with
these peers the very next
term and the new class
teacher phones us expressing
the view that he has no
place in their school
- he should be in a school
for children with severe
learning difficulties!
Before long Gerry was
showing his distress by
bedwetting, something
he had not done since
the age of three years.
We were able to improve
this situation somewhat
but it continued to be
less than satisfactory
by our standards.
At
this time, we were supporting
another lad with Down
syndrome of the same age
and with a very similar
profile of abilities and
special needs in a nearby
school. The contrast was
dramatic. This junior
school had two children
with Down syndrome on
the school roll and all
the staff were immensely
proud of the progress
of both of them. We would
observe that the two schools
had different atmospheres
and different attitudes
to all their children,
confirming what we had
read and have stated at
the start of this article.
The
schools that are best
for all children are the
best for those with very
special needs.
Some
headteachers might reflect
further on the significance
of this as it implies
that schools who are not
good at meeting the needs
of special students may
not be the best schools
for all the other children
in them either.
We
could give more examples
of this kind, where a
child has made very different
progress after a school
move and has been perceived
and described very differently
by Headteachers and teachers
in the two schools.
The
message from this section
is threefold. Firstly,
successful schools clearly
recognise the wide range
of educational needs present
in any year group in any
school population and
they acknowledge that
it is their job to meet
this wide range of educational
needs. Secondly, successful
schools develop a culture
that is caring and supportive
of all in the school
community,
aiming to value diversity
and to build positive
self-esteem for all its
pupils. Thirdly, successful
schools appreciate the
effect of being valued
and feeling liked by staff
and other pupils on the
progress of all children.
School organisation and
the use of resources
If
schools are to succeed
in meeting this wide range
of needs successfully,
there needs to be flexibility
within the classroom,
within the year group
and across year groups.
Flexibility
in the classroom is easier
to achieve in the primary
years when small group
working is often the norm
within the class. This
enables children to work
at their own pace within
the class. A statemented
child in the class with
the support of an Learning
Support Assistant can
provide a bonus for other
children in the class.
This was one of the things
that we learned as soon
as we began to place children
with Down syndrome in
infant schools with a
full-time Learning Support
Assistant. The Learning
Support Assistant could
often work with a group
of children, all of whom
benefited from the extra
help.
After
a year, we suggested to
our LEA that it would
be cheaper to give every
reception class an additional
Learning Support Assistant
than bother to try assessing
children for Statements
before they were in school.
There are only a finite
number of different special
educational needs and
we argued that all schools
should be able to meet
the needs of the four
and five year olds in
their community, with
an Learning Support Assistant
in the class and appropriate
peripatetic advisory or
teaching input. We also
argued that assessing
the child's educational
needs once they were in
a school environment might
lead to more valid and
useful Statements. Our
advice was not taken!
We
are not in favour of special
classes or units as we
feel these are not usually
necessary and carry the
risk of segregating children
again. They also do not
recognise that all children
are children first, regardless
of disability or other
special needs. There is
no reason why any child
cannot be a member of
an ordinary class, in
the correct year group,
even if his or her educational
programme has to be provided
on an individual or small
group basis.
This
is the model that we see
working well in many secondary
schools. All children
are members of ordinary
classes and ordinary tutor
groups even when they
have considerable special
educational needs. Their
educational programme
is then worked out for
them as an individual,
just as it for the other
pupils as they make their
choices of subjects that
they wish to study. It
then becomes no more stigmatising
or isolating to have a
lesson in the Learning
Support Centre than it
does to study Spanish
rather than physics. Nor
is it any more difficult
to staff an expert Learning
Support Centre than an
English or Mathematics
Department.
In
Wisconsin, regular schools
not only have expert special
educators on their staff
but also speech and language
therapists, physiotherapists
and occupational therapists
as well. This means that
their expertise is available
to all children in the
community, in a much more
accessible way than in
the UK at present.
While
we try to support children's
learning within the classroom
in the early years, to
ensure maximum social
integration and access
to the curriculum, there
should be no rigid rules
about this. Every school,
especially every junior
school, would benefit
from a learning resource
centre, where children
can have the benefit of
individual or small group
work.
One
of the best examples of
planning such a centre
that we have come across
was in a secondary school,
where the learning resource
centre had been deliberately
sited right in the centre
of the school. In addition
to providing for those
with special educational
needs, it housed the school's
best computer resources
so that it really was
a learning resource for
all pupils. This meant
that any pupil could use
the centre without embarrassment
and that one was as likely
to find a gifted child
working there as a child
needing special additional
teaching or adapted resources.
The role of Learning Support
Assistants
The
success of many of the
placements that we have
supported has been due
in large part to the skill
and commitment of the
Learning Support Assistant
assigned to support the
child. However, many of
the schools that we have
worked with do not know
how to support and make
full use of their Learning
Support Assistant's. While
recognising that the work
of Learning Support Assistant's
is critical to the access
to mainstream school for
many children in the UK
at the present time, we
are building a system
on the cheap as most are
poorly paid, have minimal
training and no career
progression open to them.
This
situation highlights the
lack of real policy commitment
to or planning for inclusion
in this country. Some
other countries, Italy
for example, provide extra
training for qualified
teachers so that they
can become facilitators
for inclusion. This recognises
the importance of changing
the whole philosophy and
culture in many schools
and in classrooms, if
they are to become truly
inclusive communities.
Is there a message here
for our Special Educational
Needs Co-ordinator's and
their training?
Many
of our children would
not have made the academic
progress that they have
without the one-to-one
teaching provided by their
Learning Support Assistant.
However, striking the
right balance between
supporting the child and
encouraging independence
is not easy. Too much
one-to-one support for
learning can make the
child dependent on adult
support. The child needs
to learn as part of a
group and to work independently.
Too much adult support
can also make the child
seem more different to
the other children than
is necessary and prevent
them offering support
to the special child in
ways that may come quite
naturally to the children.
In
some schools, Learning
Support Assistant's have
a very difficult time.
They have no professional
training or status and
are sometimes not treated
well. We have been to
schools asking for advice
for a child, where the
Learning Support Assistant
was not allowed to talk
with us, the clear message
being that she could not
have any useful views
and must not be allowed
to get above her station!
More commonly, we find
Learning Support Assistant's
who are given too much
responsibility for the
education of the child
they are supporting either
because the school feels
no commitment to the child
or because they do not
know how to plan an educational
programme for them. The
class teacher must recognise
that he or she has the
responsibility for the
education of a statemented
child and that they have
the same right to be a
full member of the class
as any other child.
Another
difficulty an Learning
Support Assistant can
encounter is the responsibility
of knowing that a child
is not receiving an appropriate
educational programme
in the school but not
having the status to do
anything to change the
situation. They may also
be the main link between
school and family, party
to the concerns of both
sides but without the
power to solve any conflicts
of opinion. This can be
very stressful for the
Learning Support Assistant.
These
are matters for the Headteacher
to be alert to and in
many schools the status
of the Learning Support
Assistant's has improved.
Many are highly valued
and well supported by
their Special Educational
Needs Co-ordinator's.
Training programmes for
Learning Support Assistant's
are improving.
Working with parents
Many
parents of children with
special educational needs
have become experts. They
will be experts in their
knowledge of the effects
of the child's disability
on their development and
experts in teaching their
own child. Parents of
children with identifiable
disabilities often join
parent support groups
and quickly access a wide
range of information on
their child's condition.
Parents
are likely to have been
actively recruited into
early intervention programmes
by the time their child
was one year old. In these
programmes they will have
been treated as equal
partners by the professionals
and expected to be their
child's main educator.
Most early intervention
programmes recognise that
home is the most significant
learning environment for
any child's development
and that parents can be
the child's best teachers,
so they actively pass
on their skills and knowledge
to parents. Parents choose
learning goals and set
priorities based on their
view of the child's needs
and their awareness of
the whole family's needs
and resources.
This
parent-professional partnership
approach has been very
successful in pre-school
years but parents often
find that schools do not
know how to form the same
effective partnerships.
Teachers in the mainstream
are not always good at
forming a positive relationship
with parents of children
with special needs. Teachers
do not always recognise
the contribution that
parents can make in helping
the teacher to realise
the child's full potential,
if only teacher and parent
could work together.
Most
parents know that their
child will benefit if
they continue to teach
them or help them to consolidate
skills out of school hours,
but they need to know
the teacher's current
goals for the child. They
may also need materials
or ideas for activities
to be provided from school,
though often parents could
supply materials for use
in the classroom. We know
many who create wonderful
learning materials and
games at home that children
in the class would all
benefit from. Bringing
in such games can raise
the self-esteem of the
special child, as they
are used and enjoyed by
others in their class.
Many
parents have valuable
specialist knowledge of
their child and their
condition to share with
their child's teacher
if given the opportunity.
We often meet frustrated
parents who cannot offer
the information they know
the teacher would find
useful because the teacher
will not accept it. It
seems that many teachers
do not know how to establish
a partnership with parents.
Too often, we come across
situations where the teacher
seems to feel threatened
and to fear loss of face
if he or she admits that
parents could know some
things that she does not.
This is an important issue
which may need to be addressed
by training and staff
development in many schools.
Peer support
In
our experience, many schools
fail to realise that the
biggest resource that
they have available to
them to support children
with special educational
needs is the other children
in the school.
If
a child needs more help,
the first reaction is
to send for another adult,
either an assistant or
external specialist. The
use of strategies such
as peer tutoring, cross-age
tutoring, co-operative
group learning and team
projects is not as widely
developed in the UK as
in North America. All
children benefit from
these activities as they
all learn how to teach
and to co-operate with
others. These are very
valuable skills to take
to the adult work place
(7).
Explicit
use of peers to prevent
social isolation and to
build circles of friends
increases all children's
sensitivity to how others
feel if ignored or actively
rejected. Many academically
able children do not make
friends easily, so all
children in the school
will benefit when involved
in projects to help friendships.
Most teachers would benefit
from some training in
the techniques of developing
peer support systems for
teaching and for social
support.
Behaviour
Effective
behaviour management is
another area where some
staff training would be
beneficial in the majority
of schools we visit. While
children with learning
difficulties may be particularly
at risk for developing
behaviour problems as
a result of frustration
or failure, any child
can present such difficulties.
In the past few years,
a variety of good written
resources to support good
behaviour management have
become available.
Like
developing the school
culture and values, this
is a whole school issue.
All staff need to have
consistent, positive behaviour
management strategies,
not just the special needs
staff.
Staff training
We
have mentioned staff training
a number of times already.
Staff development is clearly
the responsibility of
the Headteacher and in
most schools, teachers
are able to access a variety
of training opportunities.
However, if you want to
change the school culture
and become an inclusive
school, creating the optimal
learning environment for
all, then some whole school
training will be necessary.
You must have your whole
school staff signed up
to creating the social
culture you are aiming
at (8).
In
our experience, training
sessions for the whole
staff team are extremely
valuable in giving an
opportunity to debate
these issues and make
them explicit in everyone's
thinking. You will be
very fortunate if all
your staff have positive
attitudes towards a truly
inclusive culture, but
it is useful for the whole
staff team to be aware
of the attitudes and prejudices
of colleagues. It can
also be salutary for those
with negative views to
realise that they are
in a minority. In addition
to a programme of training
for your whole staff aimed
at developing an inclusive
culture throughout the
school, for the benefit
of all your pupils, it
is important to consider
the preparation of staff
and other pupils for the
arrival of a pupil with
a particular disability.
We
find that a session on
Down syndrome, for example,
for the whole staff team,
before the child arrives
at school, is very helpful
in preparing the way for
successful placement.
We can answer questions
about the condition, often
clearing away myths, and
we can explain how and
why this placement will
really benefit this child.
It is not appropriate
to expect the special
needs staff to educate
the rest of the staff
team or to expect them
to succeed in an atmosphere
where a majority of staff
do not think that they
have any responsibility
for children with special
needs in the school.
Preparation
of pupils is also important
if a child with obvious
special needs is coming
into a school with no
other similarly disabled
pupils. We would suggest
both a whole school approach
and a class approach.
The whole school approach
might use an assembly
to make clear to all children
the welcome and support
expected for the child,
and therefore reinforcing
explicit awareness of
the school's values. The
class approach can include
discussion of explicit
strategies for welcome
and for peer support for
the child as well as giving
children an opportunity
to be informed about the
specific disability so
that they can understand
the child's needs and
respond sensitively.
Financial Resources
We
have deliberately left
the issue of costs until
the end of the article
as, while we recognise
that additional support
for children with special
needs costs money, our
value system would lead
us to argue that children
with special needs have
the same right to share
in the community's resources
as all other children.
They have a right to be
part of the ordinary world
of childhood in their
community - and that means
a right to go to school
with the children in their
neighbourhood.
On
a national, or on an area
education authority scale,
it does not cost more
to put the resources into
mainstream rather than
special segregated school.
In fact many would argue
that it is a fairer use
of specialist resources
(since, when specialist
teachers and therapists
are moved to mainstream
sites, their expertise
is available to many more
children). But this requires
a full commitment to inclusion
and a total reorganisation
of the education system.
It certainly costs more
to include statemented
children while still maintaining
special schools.
We
would argue that the challenge
for an education authority
or a school is to make
the best use of its resources
in an equitable way for
all its pupils. Lack of
money should never be
an excuse for not allowing
access to a statemented
child - this amounts to
discrimination on the
basis of disability (as
do the other clauses allowing
exclusion in our legislation!).
Conclusions
In
this article, we have
emphasised the effect
of social opportunities
on the development of
all children and the role
of the school in providing
a social world that promotes
the values we would like
to see expressed in our
society at large. We have
argued that such a school
will provide the environment
for all children to flourish,
socially, emotionally
and academically.
References
1. Ainscow, M (Ed.) (1991)
Effective Schools for
All. London: Fulton.
2. Brown, L., Long, E.,
Udvari-Solner, A., Schwartz,
P., VanDeventer, P., Ahlgren,
C., Johnson, F., Gruenewald,
L. & Jorgensen, J.
(1989) Should students
with severe intellectual
disabilities be based
in regular or special
education classrooms in
home schools. Journal
of the Association for
Persons with Severe Handicaps,
14(1), 8-12.
3. Bird, G. & Buckley,
S. (1994) Meeting the
Educational Needs of Children
with Down Syndrome: A
handbook for teachers.
University of Portsmouth.
Available Online: http://www.down-syndrome.net/library/books/meeting-ed-needs/
4. Brown. L. (1994) Inclusion
in Education and Employment.
Paper presented at the
5th World Congress on
Down Syndrome. Orlando,
USA.
5. Roffey, S., Tarrant,
T. & Majors, K. (1994)
Young Friends: School
and Friendship. London:
Cassell.
6. Lawrence, D. (1996)
Enhancing Self-Esteem
in the Classroom. Paul
Chapman Publishing.
7. Johnson, D.W. &
Johnson, R.T. (1994) Learning
Together and Alone. Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
8. Ainscow, M. (1993a)
Teacher education as a
strategy for developing
inclusive schools. In
R. Slee (Ed.) Is There
a Desk with My Name On
It? The Politics of Integration.
London: Falmer
Bibliography
Ainscow,
M., Hopkins, D., Southworth,
G. & West, M (1994)
Creating the Conditions
for School Improvement.
London: Fulton
Clark,
C., Dyson, A. & Millward,
A. (Eds.) (1995) Towards
Inclusive Schooling. London:
Fulton.
Carpenter,
B., Ashdown, R. &
Bovair, K. (Eds.) (1996)
Enabling Access: Effective
Teaching and Learning
for Pupils with Learning
Difficulties. London:
Fulton
Garner,
P., Hinchcliffe, V. &
Sandow, S. (1995) What
Teachers Do: Developments
in Special Education.
Paul Chapman Publishing
Limited.
O'Brien,
J. & Forest, M. (1989)
Action for Inclusion.
Inclusion Press.
Wong,
B. Y. L. (1996) The ABC's
of Learning Disabilities.
Academic Press.
The Authors
Sue
Buckley is Professor of
Developmental Disability
at the Department of Psychology
at the University of Portsmouth,
UK. She is also Director
of The Centre for Disability
Studies at The University
of Portsmouth and Director
of Research and Information
Services and at The Down
Syndrome Educational Trust.
She also serves as a Non-Executive
Director of the Portsmouth
and South East Hampshire
District Health Authority
and on the boards of the
European Down Syndrome
Association and the International
Down Syndrome Federation.
Gillian
Bird is Director of Consultancy
and Education Services
at The Down Syndrome Educational
Trust and has been been
supporting children with
Down syndrome in mainstream
school placements for
the past 10 years.
Both
Sue Buckley and Gillian
Bird regularly provide
consultancy and training
for schools and LEA's
through The Down Syndrome
Educational Trust.