Abstract
Teachers new to inclusive ways of working in both Anhui Province, China, and in Laos have received quite explicit directions. This is in contrast to many northern and western settings where there is less emphasis on the practical details of inclusive classrooms and more on gaining agreement with the principle of inclusion. The paper uses classroom examples from Laos and the USA to argue that some simple directions can help teachers build the necessary body of experience and that this will lead to a fuller understanding of the principles involved. It goes on to document a possible learning route from following directions to creative implementation and illustrates this with an example from Anhui.
The Issue
In 1996, when Professor Mel Ainscow took part in the evaluation of an integrated education project in Chinese kindergartens, he found the level of direction given to teachers a puzzle. Three years later this aspect continued to concern him. In a discussion on collaborative evaluation he stated:
"After I had commented about how directive these instructions sounded from a Western perspective the team had the first of many discussions about cultural factors and how they influence processes that occur in educational settings. In this instance, Chinese colleagues argued that in their context people were willing to accept directions when faced with new circumstances. This was, they suggested, in the nature of 'Chinese pragmatism'." (Ainscow 1999)
The 'directions' that concern Ainscow relate to the general changes in the classroom needed to make them more child friendly and more able to include the diversity in the classroom as well as to the specific issue of accepting children with special needs. The short training workshops had not only dealt briefly with the 'Why' of the new teaching styles, but also included clear directions on 'How to begin'.
This is not to say that the 'Why' was not an issue. Discussion on the right of all children to access education and the economic and social benefits (both for the individual and society) took place in the training workshops.
However, I feel very strongly that successful integration /inclusion cannot happen merely because a person accepts an intellectual, philosophic or moral argument. The problem is that, in many instances, ' the western perspectives' on disability and special educational needs assume that once the argument is accepted, the practice will automatically follow. Thus there is an emphasis on the 'why' and a great distrust of the 'how'.
I would like to suggest that a consideration of the relationship between theory and practice leads one to a different viewpoint, and that this can help in the urgent task of creating 'Schools for All'.
The moral imperative
Once an issue is seen as a 'moral imperative' it becomes nearly impossible to discuss the difficulties of implementation. This is graphically shown by Bricker (1995) in writing about the problems of implementation in American schools. Following assurances that she does not support segregation, Bricker writes:
'......Rather, my difficulty comes in the simplistic and naive declarations about how to achieve this goal [of full inclusion]. The content of many written documents and verbal presentations suggest that we, like the Nike commercial, "Just do it." On the contrary, I believe considerable thought and planning are required......' (p180)
The very fact that Bricker felt that she had to devote nearly two pages of her paper establishing her right to criticise current practice by showing that she is not 'anti-inclusion' and has a 'history of long-term involvement in developing integrated programs for young children with disabilities..' , is indicative of the way the issue has been seen as a moral and legal and value laden question. She feels that even to suggest that current practice is not good enough will leave her 'lined up with those on the wrong side' [of the fence]. This she finds 'at the very least disconcerting'.
After giving very pertinent observed examples (see BOX 1) and detailing what she considers to be necessary for success, Bricker concludes, in a colleague's words:
'Like many things in education we tend to bulldoze ahead based on 'principle' with little thought given to how to make that principle truly supportive of the development of all children. Of particular concern is the fact that little empirical effort is invested in describing what is happening in the integrated environment and how to support efforts so that better things happen.' (p 192)
Where educationalists talk of ' accepting principles', development agencies and non-government organisations (NGOs) tend to use the term 'awareness raising' to describe the process of changing people's concepts and ideologies. In the 'development business' in poorer countries, agencies sometimes assume that once teachers are 'aware' then they can "Just do it" in the same way that Bricker describes the US teachers are expected to have no problems once a principle has been accepted.
However, my experiences in Asia would suggest that 'awareness raising' provides no solid basis for change. This is partly because (as described above) the ideas presented cannot be openly argued against. Anyone who disagrees or has doubts has clearly 'failed to have their awareness raised'. They must therefore be stupid, or cruel, or unfeeling, or just plain wrong. As none of us like to be labeled in this way we stifle our doubts and concerns about 'how' and agree on the surface. What happens then depends on the power of the individual and the options open to them; some may simply refuse by leaving the job; some may say, 'Well I agree in principle, but it won't work here because....'; most doubters will lose motivation and resort to passive resistance so that when it fails (which it will under these circumstances) they can mentally adopt an "I told you so!" attitude.
The second problem with 'awareness raising' is that the issues cannot be fully understood without personal experience. The relationship between theory and practice is not linear - first you learn the theory and then you 'do' the practice. No, the relationship is dialectical with practice both being informed by theory and building theoretical understanding. Each are returned to over and over again enriching each other.
Similar ideas also inform modern management theory. Klein (1998) uses arguments on organisational learning capability as it relates to NGOs. Using a division of learning into how and why Edmonson & Moingeon (1998) argue that competitive business advantage is gained only when management knows when to use each resource. They also say that it is wrong to assume that learning why is a superior activity. In applying this idea to development Klien gives the following example:
'NGOs sometimes fail to find the proper balance. After "discovering" the importance of learning WHY, an NGO lagged behind preparing their new managers in the 'arts of the business', the HOW. Thus there were managers in the field offices who were aware of the strategic challenges to the ethos of the organisation, but did not know the "commonalties' in terms of procedures for monitoring and evaluating, financial control, Human Resources etc. They were clearly "limping" and their capacity as managers was certainly limited' (Klien 1998 p 11)
I would like to argue that the same is true in teacher development, and that whilst there are cultural (and very great resource) differences, help with how speeds the learning process in most situations.
The American chair and the Lao needle
Becky was 5 years old when she enrolled in a summer preschool programme in Oregon USA. She showed developmental delay and had problems with speech. She was closely observed by Eileen Hughes as part of a doctoral thesis called 'Narratives from the Sandbox'. The observations were used by Bricker to support her discussion and shown here in the chair story (BOX 1).
Nikonh was three years old on entering a kindergarten in a small provincial town 400 km from the capital of Laos, Vientiane. The school had just joined the Lao Integrated Education programme initiated by the Lao Ministry of Education and supported by SCF(UK) and UNESCO. He has very low vision, is undersized and has additional skin problems. The observations in the needle story (BOX 2) are mine.
| Box 1 The Chair 'In the first week of school, Becky fell out of the small chairs in the class......Because Becky lost her balance on the small chairs in the classroom, she used a slightly larger chair positioned against the wall at the table. While this was a solution to the tipping chairs, it created a place away from the children and hence a special place for Becky...... The children came to learn that this was her place and never used it themselves. If she was bothering them they directed her back to this place. (When Becky comes back, Ashley is standing in front of her [own] chair as she paints. Becky goes to move Ashley's chair; Ashley tells her, "This is mine. Yours is the one over there," pointing to Becky's table and chair against the wall. The teacher tells Becky, "Here is one ...Now go to your table"). There were a few occasions by the end of the summer school session in which Becky initiated finding a chair at another table (and did not fall out). However by this time, the children had learned that Becky's place was against the wall.' Hughes (1993) quoted in Bricker (1995) |
| Box 2 The Needle When I first saw the classroom and Nikonh, it was clear that the teacher was trying to work in new ways that had been introduced to her in a workshop during the school holiday a few weeks before. Despite the overcrowding and the pitifully few bits of equipment she had decorated the wooden walls with some pictures and was trying to ensure all children got a chance to play with the two wooden puzzles by splitting them into two groups. Unfortunately this had led to a 'competition' between the groups, and although sitting in one of the groups Nikonh was unable to take part. After the puzzles were completed the teacher worked with Nikonh by himself while the assistant organised a game. This meant that he was also excluded from the game. Later the support team talked with the teacher about her lesson and related it to some of the training she had received. Support was continued by the local team and through further contact with other teachers in the programme. One year later, I again visited this classroom. This time it was a bright and welcoming place full of pictures by children and games and toys made from junk and natural materials. There was a hum as children chatted and worked in different groups. And Nikonh had 'disappeared'. No, he was not in the small group with the building blocks (made from off-cuts); he was not in the group listening to a story being read by the assistant; neither was he in the group making patterns with pebbles on the dark wooden floor. Then I saw him bent over his work threading patterns with some others and chatting to a neighbour. I was amazed because I did not know how he could take part in this activity. The children were threading short pieces of transparent drinking straws and small squares and circles of scrap fabric onto plastic string. This required the careful placement of the end of the soft string into the hole at the end of the straw pieces and gently pushing the string through being careful not to let it bunch up inside. I knew that there was no way Nikonh had sufficient vision to do this by sight like the other children. As I bent over his shoulder to watch, I noticed the needle. He was using a home-made needle made from a sliver of wood with a hole punched in the end. I smiled and looked across to the teacher. "Is that all right?" she said. "Oh Yes!" I said, "It is excellent!" "I was only trying to put in practice the need for 'small changes in activities' so that all children could take part," she replied. |
The most significant point of difference between these two stories is that, in their day to day work, these two teachers behaved quite differently towards the child with special needs. In the first case the actions of the American teacher led to increased isolation and 'specialness' for the child, while the actions of the Lao teacher led to increased inclusion, greater access to the curriculum and a normalisation of the child's social life. As can be seen, inclusion is accomplished in the fine detail of the interaction between teachers and children.
Like the Chinese teachers, the Lao teachers had also had some quite clear instructions which related to the particular issues and decision making faced by them in the classroom. In the example in BOX 2, the teacher refers to the need to find 'small changes'. This comes directly from the directions that had been given in the training workshop:
It is tempting to speculate whether Becky's teacher could have provided a more inclusive setting if she had also had some simple direct instructions as a guide to action, and whether such guidance would have been welcome. Directions do not necessarily reduce freedom of action. In this instance, following a simple direction to find the minimal changes needed, increases teacher autonomy by putting in her hands the need to use her own professional skill and judgment to the full.
If Becky's teacher had been directed to try and find minimal solutions, it is possible that the following less isolating solutions could have been tried. With a special chair, the teacher could have tried any of the following:
Without the chair, the teacher could have tried;
All these are creative solutions which rely on teachers increasing their problem solving skills. I would like to suggest that, had Becky's teacher been given straight forward instructions, and some support as she began to incorporate the new ways of working, she would have found these (or other) more inclusive answers for Becky. Furthermore, the skills she developed would have informed all her teaching and thus would benefit all children in her class. It is this aspect that makes me confident that inclusive types of teaching bring benefits for all children and not just those with designated 'special needs'. As it is, Becky's teacher was not only unable to consider these other solutions she was unaware of the additional problems she was creating by further isolation of Becky in the classroom.
It is possible that the access American teachers have to resources and special education expertise works against inclusion. In both Laos and China teachers must make their own equipment from available materials. This is quite a burden but it does mean that there is every incentive to provide minimum rather than maximum changes. The provision of a special chair may have been seen as necessary long term need (rather than a temporary solution to be discarded as soon as possible) but as soon as it was installed the isolation of Becky from other children and the restriction of both the activities available to her ( to those set out on her table) and choice of friendships (to those children at her table) increased. Furthermore, if the chair was bought with special funds allocated to Becky it is natural that staff and children would see the chair as exclusively 'belonging' to Becky. And if the funds for the chair have been applied for, argued for, and 'won', there may be enormous pressure on all to ensure that Becky actually uses the chair so as to justify the purchase.
Another significant difference is that in Laos and other developing countries, the class teacher is the person responsible for the education of all children in her class - including those with special needs In western countries access to expertise can both help the teacher but also hinder inclusion as the 'expert' may see their responsibility as directed only to the one or two children 'designated' as having special needs. It is quite possible that the advice given is aimed at 'individualised' solutions which mimic standard special school practice. As the class teacher's decision making is handed over to another who is seen as more knowledgeable, she may back away from bringing her creative (minute by minute) problem solving skills to the situation.
However, having acknowledged these additional problems (which, curiously enough, relate to the problems of wealth not poverty) for many western teachers, I would still maintain that the main difficulty is a product of a misunderstanding of the relationship between theory and practice; the relationship between the 'why' and the 'how'.
Taking Off
There is always the danger that when directions are given or people are specifically taught how to do something they will apply this in an unthinking non-creative way. Is it possible for teachers to begin by following instructions on how to do it, and yet gradually upgrade their understanding of why and thus become highly creative and innovative practitioners - taking off on a solo flight?
Experience in Asia suggests that, given the right circumstances, this learning process is entirely possible. At a certain point in the learning spiral, teachers can and do 'take off' by themselves; producing an inclusive style of teaching which can be a joy to watch.
During the visit to China (see p 1) and after watching many teachers in different schools, Ainscow was able to 'tentatively' suggest three levels of implementation. In order to facilitate discussion, his notes are reproduced in full here, before I go on to provide an illustration.
'Level I - Pre-implementation .Here teachers may not have been exposed to the ideas of the innovation or, if they have, have not yet introduced them into their classroom. Typically lessons are well planned, lively and stimulating, with content usually at an interest level that is appropriate for the children. Activities are mainly directed by adults to the class as a whole, with limited use of play, group activities and individual teaching. Additional adults may observe the lesson, or carry out preparation and clearing-up tasks. Since the emphasis is on achieving conformity of response it is difficult to integrate children with special needs.
Level 2 - Standard Implementation. Here teachers who have been exposed to the innovation use its recommended approaches in their day-to-day work. This means that the day has been restructured in order to include group and individual teaching sessions, alongside whole class activities. Teaching s still mainly directed by adults. However, there are also play sessions which are intended to encourage independence and provide children with a certain amount of choice. Additional adults may observe the lesson, carry out preparation and clearing up tasks, and encourage children with special needs to participate. Integration of children with special needs is possible but is difficult with those who do not conform to requirements.
Level 3 - Creative Implementation. Here teachers who have been exposed to the innovation adapt and develop its recommended approaches in order to facilitate the participation of all children in lesson activities. The elements of restructuring referred to at level 2 are all present but are used flexibly. Teachers are sensitive to the feedback of individual children and use varied methods to encourage participation. Additional adults share a variety of roles that are intended to support learning. Since the emphasis is on participation the classroom is becoming more "inclusive".'
Ainscow (1996) personal communication
Level 1 should be familiar to most readers and is the situation in standard traditional classrooms.. Level 2 and 3 are more interesting. In this context, level 2 is the result of following initial 5 day training workshops. Making use of the fact that the large classes (up to 45 children were taught by a team of two teachers, the instructions included using small group discussion (not more than 12 children) so as to increase interaction and increase involvement of children; more use of open questioning; play (including imaginative play); individual work with children when needed; observation and planning; child to child help; and a variety of activities. At stage 2 these are demonstrated but strictly adhered to. By stage three, teachers confidently and flexibly use all their experience and stop holding rigidly to the formula. BOX 3 gives an example of this situation.
| Box 3 Mirrors and Emotions Class of the oldest kindergarten children (5-6 years): 36 children present: two teachers (T1 and T2); 'Morning exercise' was held outside on this cold but sunny day. This is a standard feature of Chinese schools but here it had evolved into complex 'circle dancing' with simple equipment such as bottle top shakers or chopsticks to bang together like drum sticks. The children then entered the classroom in which tables were placed in 6 groups, and chose where they wished to sit. There are three small mirrors on each table......... Activity 1 - led by T1 Following a time to play with the sunlight on the mirrors, the teacher asked the children to use the mirrors and their neighbours to consider the way emotions showed in facial expressions. This led a full class discussion on smiling, then crying and then angry faces. There was a very lively discussion in which children's contributions were accepted and built on. For example crying might happen 'when Mum or Dad tells me off...'; 'when you fight with a friend...' Similarly, 'I get angry when someone tries to scare me'. etc. T2 was with the children listening to shy children and encouraging them to contribute -- 'Lei lei has a good idea -- go on tell everyone'. This was followed by an activity in which children used paper shapes placed on paper circles to create expressions. Choice and creativity were encouraged and half way through 4 children who had finished were invited to create new ones on the blackboard. At the end of this activity children were encouraged to walk round and look at everyone's work, after which the mirrors were taken outside for more play with sunbeams and a some free outdoor play. Meanwhile T2 carefully studied the faces, commenting on variety and creativity and taking particular note of those made by less able children - 'Oh good, he didn't have to wait to copy one from the blackboard'. She then gathered up the shapes and papers from these temporary (therefore, resource cheap) pictures, and prepared for the craft activities to follow. As the children came in they went to the toilet, washed their hands and helped themselves to soya milk and a snack followed by independent clearing up. Activity 2 - led by T2 After gently calming the children by doing some hand exercise and talking about hands so that the children gradually quietened as they joined in, she introduced seven craft activities. One was entirely new and this she carefully demonstrated and gave brief instruction for the others. Children could choose which table to join (knowing that they would eventually get the chance to do everything) The six tables offered a range of difficulty thus enabling more T1 and T2 help with the difficult ones and independent working at others. Work took place with children chatting, helping each other and teachers helping and talking with children. Of particular note, was the group working on the tiled wall outside. The mural was entirely in children's hands with changes being made by erasing parts or by adding or altering the picture; 'I don't think the rainbow has enough colours yet. I think I'll add some more..' 'This bus has been here a long time. Shall we change it to something else?' After clearing up, a role play session started. This had been in preparation all week. It was a 'Fashion Show' with suitably bizarre clothing and facial expressions!. Children who did not want to take part played outside in front of the classroom. This inevitably included discussion on the changes that had been made to their wall painting. |
My observation notes only gives a pale reflection of this enormously busy, warm-hearted classroom, so it is perhaps worthwhile detailing some of the aspects which contributed to the inclusive nature:
At the same time the elements of the curriculum are all there. For non-Chinese readers it is worth pointing out that kindergartens need to include many pre-reading activities. These include a good knowledge and understanding of shape, good hand eye coordination, and the ability to memorise sequences of movement. 'Delicate' craft activities, description of shapes, and dance sequences all prepare children for the complexity of reading, and then writing, Chinese characters.
This is a whole school change as the head teacher explained to me:
'I heard about the project and I volunteered and then explained to the teachers. All the teachers understand that we should love and care for all children including those with special needs. .......[Furthermore] we realised that this was most important an that the new teaching methods were not just for special needs children but represented a great move forward in teaching reform.....We know there are differences between children at different levels. Small group discussion is the most useful method but we can't use this all day because it is difficult for time, so we plan its use. We don't use individual activities generally because we can use games and activities to tackle problems. Using very small groups of 3-5 is helpful. If we put the special child with a few others having problems [with this activity] we can help them and also assess progress. There are many ways of working with children. We try to find out what will work.'
Conclusion
So is the use of direct instruction a cultural issue - a product of the perceived 'conformity' sometimes attributed to Asian cultures? I do not think so. It cannot explain the way teachers and schools can move on and 'take off' alone as they seek to 'find out what will work' from the 'many ways of working with children'. Of course, other aspects of a programme are needed to encourage this - support visits and discussion, staff meetings in schools, contact between schools, discussions and seminars to share experiences - and thus feedback on the experiences of each teacher which encourages reflection and analysis of their experiences.
It is not simply a matter of telling teachers what to do but of enabling refection on those experiences brought about by working in new ways. It was the experiences of holding small group discussion that enabled these Chinese teachers to feel what could be gained through higher levels of interaction with children. The encouragement to experiment led them to try to see whether this could be transposed back into whole class teaching and then opt for a mixture of small group discussion and whole class discussion with the new higher levels of interaction.
The head teacher's comment also shows how an appreciation of 'why' led to their volunteering to take part but, after that, the 'how' was needed for their early learning to take place. In turn this led to a fuller appreciation of the theoretical concerns behind the development.
Moving beyond the directions and applying the lessons gained in earlier more directed ways of working brings about new professional skills and the confidence to experiment. It is experimentation and the ability to reflect about the needs of children, about their varied strengths and weaknesses, about the choices in methodology and how to maximise the potential of all children that make for inclusive styles. At the beginning of the change process, help with how to do this is needed if each teacher and each school is to travel that road. Leaving teachers (like Becky' teacher) without such help means that learning opportunities for both teachers and children are lost. This seems such a pity - the investment in training and support are so very small and the gains can be so large.
There is still too little known about the process of change in schools and the differences brought about by culture, resources, initial training and conditions of work. More research is needed in this field; research which carefully monitors the reality of the classrooms and in which discussion is not held back by the fear Bricker felt in challenging current practice. I hope this paper can modestly contribute to that process.
References
Ainscow M. (1996) The Integrated Education Project in Anhui - Towards a Theory of Implementation : personal communication
Ainscow M. (1999) Understanding the Development of Inclusive Schools : Falmer Bricker D. (1995) The Challenge of Inclusion in the Journal of Early Intervention. Vol. 19, No.3 pp179-194
Edmonson & Moingeon (1998) The How and Why of Organisational Learning. in Mastering Global Business : Financial Times
Klien R.E. (1998) Management and Change in the Profit and Non-Profit World : unpublished paper
Lao Ministry of Education (1997) Management of the Integrated Education Programme - Guidelines: Lao MoE/SCF(UK)
 |
 |