Presented at ISEC 2000

Inclusion and Quality - Differentiated Classroom Management

Level of importance and difficulty attached by primary school teachers

José Morgado

Abstract

The development of educational systems in many of developed countries have been organised over two nuclear and interdependent factors - inclusion (Education for all) and efficacy. These subjects are so complex and multidimensional that, in our research, we only study aspects related to pedagogical practices of primary teachers.

Thus, we have three main goals. First, understand the attached importance by teachers to a set of procedures in classroom management, which are strong contributions for efficacy and quality of education. To reach first and second goals we use surveys and deep interviews for the qualitative data. Surveys consider the following dimensions of procedures - Organisation of pupils, evaluation, planning materials, learning tasks and social environment.

The research involves about 240 primary teachers and considers as main variables: Professional Experience, Role (regular and support teachers), experience in the assigned role, teachers training ( We will present some of preliminary data from the two surveys addressed.

I - CONCEPTUAL FRAME

1 - POLITICAL LEVEL

The development of educational systems is strongly related with political options. Thus, if the way seems to be

GLOBALIZATION,

*

DEVELOPMENT is required;

*

HUMAN RESOURCES are the basis;

*

QUALIFICATION is the condition;

*

EDUCATION is the tool, and

*

QUALITY FOR ALL is the main goal

2 - THEORETICAL LEVEL

SCHOOL QUALITY/EFFECTIVE SCHOOL (CLASSROOM LEVEL)

DIFFERENTIATED CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT - ORGANIZATION MODEL

DIMENSIONS:

A - Organization of pupils work

B - Evaluation

C - Planning

D - Materials/Resources

E - Learning activities/Tasks

F - Social climate

II - RESEARCH MAIN GOALS

1 - Analyse the level of importance and difficulty attached by teachers of primary schools concerning pedagogical practices

2 - Understand the qualitative nature of difficulties referred

3 - Design an importance and difficulty perception scale concerning differentiated classroom management

III - SAMPLE

TOTAL - 234 primary teachers - 192 E and 42 G

168 regular teachers

66 support teachers - 22 with specialized training and 44 without specialized training

Aged from 23 to 60

Regular teachers - experience from 1 to 33

Support teachers - experience from 1 to 34

School size (number of teachers) - from 1 to 34

IV - INSTRUMENT

1 - A 39 itens likert scale (10 points) demanding importance and difficulty attached by teachers concerning pedagogical practices

eg. 31- clear presentation of educational goals

2 - Deep interview for qualitative data

V - RESULTS

In this presentation we emphasize two points.

1 - Dimensions sorted by means (importance and difficulty)

It is important to stress that, from teachers point of view, the most important dimension "SOCIAL CLIMATE" is the easier dimension to run in classroom. It seems to exist a protection strategie of self-efficacy perception. We are trying to better understand this question through content analysis of deep interviews.

2 - DIFFERENTIATED CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT - DIFFICULTY AND IMPORTANCE PERCEPTION SCALE

After factor analysis procedures we get two scales with 15 itens. Internal consistency (alpha):

DIFFICULTY SCALE - .9310

IMPORTANCE SCALE - .9619

eg:

1- Use of formative evaluation methodology

Both scales, seems to be good instruments to evaluate teachers perceptions of importance and difficulty concerning pedagogical practices in order to promote a more differentiated classroom management, the way to reach a higher level of inclusion and quality in our primary schools.

References

Ainscow, M. (1991. Preface. In Ainscow (Ed), Effective Schools for All. London. Fulton.

Ainscow, M. (1991. Introduction and Overview. In Ainscow (Ed), Effective Schools for All. London. Fulton.

Ainscow, M. (1991).Towards Effective School for All: Some Problems and Possibilities. In Ainscow (Ed), Effective Schools for All. London. Fulton.

Creemers, B.P.M. (1994). The Effective Classroom. London. Cassell.

Dalin, P. (1998). School Development: Theories and Strategeies. London. Cassell.

Dalin, P. (1998). School Development: Theories and Strategeies. London. Cassell.

Dean, J.(2000). Improving Children's Learning: Effective Teaching in the Primary School. London. Routledge.

Lindsay, G. & Thompson, D. (1997). Values and Special Education. In Lindsay & Thompson (Eds). Values into Practice in Special Education. London. Fulton.

Porter, G. (1995). Organization of Schooling: Achieving Access and Quality through Inclusion. Prospects, vol XXV, nº 2, June. p. 299-309. UNESCO

Reynolds, D.; Creemers, B.P.M.; Nesselrodt, P.S.; Schaffer, E.C.; Stringfield, S.; Teddlie, C. (1994). Advances in School Effectiveness Research and Practice. Oxford. Pergamon.

Scheerens, J. & Creemers, B.P.M. (1989). Conceptualizing School Effectiveness. In International Journal of Educational Research, 13 (7) 691-706.

Slavin, R. (1987). A Theory of School and Classroom Organization. In Educational Psychologist, 22 (2) 89-108.

Slee, R. (1991). Learning Initiatives to Include All Students in Regular Schools. In Ainscow (Ed), Effective Schools for All. London. Fulton.

Slee, R. (1995). Inclusive Education: From Policy to School Improvement. In Clark, C.; Dyson, A. & Millward, A. (Eds). (1995). Towards Inclusive Schooling. London. Fulton.

Visser, J. (1993) Differentiation: Making it Work. NASEN Publications.UK.

Wang. M. C. (1991). Adaptive Instruction: An Alternative Approach to Providing for Student Diversity. In Ainscow (Ed), Effective Schools for All. London. Fulton.

Index