Search

This paper examines the perceptions of staff within a university in the UK, of the role of teaching assistants and centrally located disability services. Staff were generally positive about support available although when communication had broken down this led to a lack of trust with centrally organised support. Staff were happy for support staff to be available within the classroom although this role was misunderstood. At times tensions arose around adjustments to classroom practices which were recommended by centrally located staff. Paradoxically, centrally organised support may have acted as a barrier to more inclusive teaching practice: whilst teaching staff often disagreed with recommendations for adjustments to teaching practice made by central staff they were nonetheless reluctant to take on the role of acting as the expert in these situations. Implications for practice and service delivery are discussed alongside suggestions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we examine different aspects of the inclusion debate, including how it has been shaped by the political context in England over the past 30 years. We then give consideration to the key argument that has dominated the inclusion agenda over the last decade: should effective inclusion be considered only as placement in mainstream school settings, or can one consider inclusion in a specialist placement as successful? Research studies examining the views of children, parents and teaching staff are also discussed. Consideration is given as to whether a 'universalist' view of inclusion (in which special schools should not be offered) is one that is feasible and desirable. The key arguments highlighted include those relating to 'quality' in education, academic and social inclusion, human rights, parental choice and teachers' attitudes and skills. The role of some professional groups in supporting inclusion, such as educational psychologists ( EPs) and Special Educational Needs Coordinators ( SENCos), is also examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Those who work in education strive to create more inclusive environments in school but are often stymied in their efforts by challenges coming from many and varied directions. Politicians, for example, exhort us to be more inclusive but create conditions that encourage separation and exclusion, and inclusive education's history in special education means that the default response of the system around special education is to diagnose, treat and manage separately. That legacy continues to have its effects. Looking both at the history of the management of 'special needs' and at the continuing rise in numbers of marginalised, separated and excluded youngsters, we suggest that some fundamental shifts are necessary in the way that we think about and research into difficulty at school if we are to move beyond Groundhog Day. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the process by which children attending mainstream UK primary schools can achieve social inclusion. It presents the findings from a systematic literature review, followed by empirical research, exploring the concept of social inclusion with particular regard to the experiences of pupils identified with SEND. The article draws upon research conducted for the author's doctoral study, which explored management of the role of Teaching Assistants on the social inclusion of pupils identified with SEND in mainstream primary schools. Reviewing relevant literature has informed the presentation of two researcher‐ devised models, tentatively depicting the process of social inclusion for pupils identified with SEND in mainstream primary communities, as 'fuzzy generalizations', to inform future research. Firstly, an 'ideal' model of social inclusion is presented, highlighting the likely process by which pupils may achieve the end goal of social inclusion: participation. Secondly, a 'current' model of social inclusion is presented, which draws upon the empirical research conducted in three mainstream primary contexts for the author's doctoral study. The two models highlight the frequent disparity between the 'ideal' goal of social inclusion and the current outcome of the process of social inclusion for many pupils identified with SEND in mainstream primary contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]