Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress International Special Education Conference Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity? 1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland

home about the conference programme registration accommodation contact

EFFECTIVE CLASSROOM PRACTICE IN SECONDARY EDUCATION IN SPAIN

Dr. Pilar Arnaiz, Dr. Pedro P. Berruezo, Dr. Remedios de Haro, Dr. Rogelio Martínez
Faculty of Education

University of Murcia (Spain)

parnaiz@um.es

SUMMARY:

Attention to the diversity of pupils’ needs within Compulsory Secondary Education (12-16 years) in Spain demands important organisational changes in schools. These changes are essential if the required pedagogical solutions for meeting the heterogeneous needs of pupils are to be found and implemented. Moreover, these changes must ensure that the educational approaches used with pupils who have special educational needs are not delivered in a separate and different environment to their school and community peers. An inclusive approach must be a natural part of the entire educational process, where all the pupils have access to education of quality that satisfies their educational needs in a context of justice and social equality.

From this political and educational perspective, a project to conduct an analysis of effective inclusive practice in secondary education has been developed in the Autonomous Region of Murcia (Spain). The objective of this research is to identify and describe some effective strategies in secondary classrooms devoted to inclusion and promotion of the educational progress of all pupils. The paper will examine some of the determinants of effective classroom practice, as well as classroom context and other variables influencing the teaching and learning processes that promote inclusion in the secondary sector. Section 1 and 2 describe the educational setting: school and specific student cases. Section 3 focuses on key elements to assess inclusive education. Finally, Section 4 includes conclusions on the Spanish experience.

INTRODUCTION

The study here presented forms part of a project of the European Agency for the Development of Special Needs Education in the context of the Research Project “Inclusive Education and Classroom Practice” co-ordinated by Cor Meijer. This project is divided into two parts, the first dealing with Primary Education and the second with Secondary Education where the Spanish contribution is to be found along with that of the 22 countries   involved in the research.

The purpose of the project is the identification of inclusive practice in classrooms; education interventions developed for the entire class that are effective for students with special educational needs, as well as the rest of their classmates.

The theoretical framework on which this project is based is that of Inclusive Education (Ainscow, 2001; Arnaiz, 2003; Ballard, 1997; Barton, 1997;   Booth y Ainscow, 1998; Dyson, 2001; Parrilla, 2002; Skrtic, 1991a, 1991b; Slee, 1993; Stainback and Stainback, 1999), along with results gained from the study carried out into Primary Education (EADSNE, 2003). It is assumed that good practice is linked to the teacher’s work in the classroom.

It is worth pointing out that teachers’ actions in their turn depend upon their training, experience, beliefs and attitudes as well as other internal factors such as the organisation and   planning of the class work and other factors external to the centre, such as education policy, funding and available resources. However, it is the teacher who has to implement inclusion on a daily basis and so is the decisive factor.

As teaching styles fostering inclusion can vary, the present study aims to identify different ways of handling diversity in the classroom, while bearing in mind that it does not solely depend upon the teacher, but also upon the way in which centres organise their education response and other external factors.

This research project tries to review, analyze, describe and disseminate inclusive school practice in the area of general education in order to determine the most effective ways of dealing with student diversity. It attempts to identify inclusive classrooms and the factors that promote them, with the intention of improving inclusion in centres of education. The main objective is the gathering of information on how to suitably deal with classroom diversity and necessary conditions to do so.

This study aims to explore the following research areas:

• To determine what it is that works in an inclusive environment.
• To find out in some detail how inclusive education works.
• To understand why it works, that is to identify the necessary conditions to produce it.

To tackle the areas set out, the research was organized in three phases:

• Bibliographical Review of relevant studies in order to find out what it is that works in an inclusive environment. Analysis of these research studies allows the identification of possible models of inclusive classrooms in different contexts.
• Selection of different education experiences where inclusive practices have been carried out with the aim of their analysis and extraction of the factors determining inclusivity. The focus of this stage is on how they are being developed. To do this, examples of good practice are chosen and all those factors linked to the curriculum studied:
• Characteristics of the context: the centre, management team, internal and external support, financial resources and the teachers (knowledge and skills, attitudes and motivation).
• Characteristics of the work done in class: methodology and strategies employed by the teacher.
• Interchange of experts from other countries and visits to some of the centres in the project to analyze and evaluate in situ different examples of practice developed in classrooms and discover whether they are inclusive, why they work, their most important characteristics and discuss their transferability to other countries taking part in the project. Via this third phase it is hoped to arrive at a deeper understanding of what, how and why inclusion occurs in these contexts.

The protagonists of this study are the teachers and other professionals linked to inclusive practice, both inside and outside schools. The methodology used is case studies, taking the country, centre, classroom and student as the reference point.

1. WHAT WORKS IN AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT

To tackle this area, a bibliographical study among the publications and research studies carried out in Spain linked with student integration and inclusive education was carried out. Results show that many more theoretical viewpoint studies have been undertaken than empirical studies or presentations of practical experience. This may be because inclusive education at secondary level is not yet present in all centres. The literature focuses more on how attention to diversity should be approached than on the presentation of development and evaluation of experiments.

Studies undertaken by Molinuevo, Grañeras and others (1999) show that a change of focus is underway in research into inclusion in Spain in that it is increasingly focused upon the study of schools as a whole. This change takes as a given that it is possible to educate all students in ordinary centres, as well as the need for excellence and quality. This approach reinforces the view that teaching problems cannot be isolated from the school context, so that research should concentrate on improvement and change within schools. As a result, student learning problems do not derive only from their learning difficulties, but from the way schools are organised and the characteristics of the education response provided in the classroom is directly linked to this.

In the bibliography consulted, it can be seen that the cognitive, emotional and social results attained by special needs students are directly linked to the organisational and curricular aspects that characterize school life. If processes of personalisation and individualisation of the teaching are undertaken in ordinary classrooms, the performance, socio-emotional development and self image of students who have academic problems all improve.

The majority of research projects agree in affirming that the most crucial variables for failure or success of any strategy are the training and attitude of the teacher. The strategies used by teachers (social skills, programme implementation…) to large extent depend upon their attitudes (tolerance, stimulus etc.) re the presence of students with special needs and the type of behaviour these show in class. However, it has been found that many teachers theoretically accept diversity, but their attitude becomes less positive once they have students with difficulties in their class. Sometimes, the lack of responsibility of some teachers and teaching systems that are rather inflexible and focused upon conceptual content create barriers to the inclusion process.

Re support teachers, it can be seen that the success of inclusion bears a close link to the availability and level of experience of support teachers. It is also related to the number of support teachers in the centre, the training and professional supervision they receive, their level of team work and teaching methods they use, which may or may not be suitable for the needs of the students they have. Various experiments show that when there is co-ordination, teamwork and awareness of student diversity, secondary centres are more able to offer a teaching-learning experience in line with student needs. Therefore, teacher training is of vital importance so that education practice is increasingly inclusive.

Other variables also linked to inclusive practice are the behaviour of students, number of pupils in class, student learning potential and the type of specialised help given in and outside the classroom.

To sum up, it is worth pointing out that if schools want to function as genuinely inclusive environments, they need:

• To revise curriculum content;
• To rethink the use of time and space according to aims;
• To motivate students and think about their needs;
• To start from previous knowledge and generative topics that give meaning to the practice and classroom activities;
• To work on broad, open and flexible projects that require teacher collaboration;
• To organise the centre in a way that fosters autonomy and teamwork among the students.

Thus, flexible organisation of space, time and student groupings, ratio reduction, as well as the use of a range of methodological strategies (education reinforcement measures, curricular adaptation, complementary support, group work techniques) and evaluation formats when planning the programme would all contribute to improvement in the cognitive and emotional development of the students, their social skills and integration. When all these factors work well, it can be seen that absenteeism and drop-out rates come down and the failure rate is lower. From the academic point of view, improvement in content acquisition of the different areas of the curriculum, especially in Mathematics and Language, can simultaneously be seen.

2. HOW INCLUSIVE EDUCATION WORKS  

To explore this question, observations were carried out in centres apparently dealing with diversity effectively. Centres from different countries were put forward and a group of experts visited and analyzed their education practice.

In Spain, with help from the Service for Attention to Diversity of the Education Authority of Murcia Autonomous Region, a secondary school was chosen where Compulsory Secondary Education (ESO), 16-18 higher studies (Bachillerato) and vocational training (Formación Profesional) are all given. The school was set up 6 years ago and is sited in a town of 6000, mostly of low socio-economic level, with a predominance of employment in agriculture and near to an area of tourist expansion.

One of the main characteristics of this centre is the heterogeneity of the intake. 487 students attend, of whom a quarter have special education needs. Of these, there are 16 students whose special needs are linked to personal factors of disability or behaviour problems and approximately 50 coming from other countries and cultures (especially Morocco), including gypsy children. The distribution can be seen in figures 1 and 2.

Figure 1: Centre intake

Figure 2: Immigrant students

Students in the different levels and stages are served by 57 teachers in all. Support is co-ordinated by the Orientation Department, both that offered to students with special education needs recognised within the centre and those who come at the request of the local government.

The centre has developed various programmes for dealing with diversity (see figure 3):

• Integration Support Programme:  

This is aimed at students with special education needs, whether of a permanent or temporary nature who need an education programme adapted to their particular levels of curricular competence and learning style.

• Compensatory Education Programme:

Directed at students with a low academic level who belong to cultural or ethnic minorities in situations of social disadvantage or lacking competency in Spanish language. Work with these pupils is carried out via:

• Multicultural groupings
• Spanish classes for foreign students
• Support and revision classes in core subjects
• Workshop classes
• Vocational initiation Programmes:

Designed for students over 16 who, having followed the first two years of compulsory secondary education, show serious learning difficulties and demotivation towards school work and are therefore directed towards gaining a professional qualification.

• Curricular Diversification Programme:

Aimed at students over 16 who have a low academic level, but wish to remain in schooling in order to obtain the Secondary Leaving Certificate. This may last one or two years.

• Special Needs Support Programme linked to pronounced psychological disability (PRONEEP) :

For students who have special needs linked to intellectual disability and aged between 14 and 18.

Figure 3: Attention to Diversity Centre Programmes

It is worth mentioning that given the multiplicity of programmes and centre’s organizational complexity, the majority of staff is involved in attending to special needs, in one way or another, rather than this being exclusively handled by specialised staff or members of the Orientation Department.  

As well as case studies, described below, a questionnaire was given to tutors to assess their specific knowledge of attention to diversity and their attitude towards students with special education needs.

Case studies:

— CASE 1: 3º year of Compulsory Secondary Education class

The first case put forward is from a class of third year of Compulsory Secondary Education, 22 students, among whom one, RM, has special needs linked to disability and two Moroccan students, completely integrated into the class and following the standard curriculum. Traditional methodology (teacher focused and individual tasks) predominates.

RM is 15 and has slight mental deficiency, though a high level of autonomy. His difficulties seem to arise from his cognitive level. He has great difficulty maintaining concentration to carry out activities.

Help to RM consists of substantial curricular adaptation in all curriculum areas and external support in core subjects (5 hours per week in Mathematics and Language in groups of 3 –4 students).

While all students do the same activities (teaching units, practicals…), these have been adapted to RM’s ability level, simplifying the level of difficulty or demand. RM frequently does a different, decontextualised task, the design of which, because of his attention deficit requires a quick solution and immediate reward.

The academic performance of RM has not significantly improved with these measures. He does not meet targets in approximately 50% of areas, evaluated in function of the specific curricular adaptation proposals.

— CASE 2: 2º year of Compulsory Secondary Education

The second study focuses upon a class from second year of Compulsory Secondary Education with 21 students, among whom two have special needs because of disability and another two show antisocial conduct. In particular, FJ, 14, has disruptive behaviour in class (answers back to teachers, provokes classmates with insults, destroys school property and interrupts the dynamic of the class, standing up and making noise), leading to frequent confrontation with teachers, disruption of classroom activity and poor personal performance. In spite of initial suspicions and studies undertaken, Hyperactive Attention Disorder has been ruled out, as the basic criteria for this disorder were not met.

FJ shows apathy towards school work, more as a result of lack of effort than through lack of ability. He remains in the reference group during the day except for two hours per week when he goes out of class to receive support (in Language and Social Sciences).

Teaching staff feel overwhelmed by FJ’s attitude. In spite of various strategies (giving more attention, sitting him near the front of the class), FJ has not changed his behaviour and as a result he is frequently sent out of class.

In the curricular sphere, in line with agreed action from all the teachers, activities are not significantly changed. Sometimes, in particular subjects, FJ is given short, easily resolved tasks that he finds motivating. On other occasions the level of demand is lowered. As part of the established guidelines he is given the option of going to the Orientation Department to do activities that he enjoys (search for information in Internet, reading sports articles and newspapers) whenever his class   behaviour has been good.

The Orientation Department suggested a series of norms to the teaching body. There is co-ordination to ensure concerted action. As a result, FJ’s self esteem has risen and he has higher personal expectations. However, his behaviour is ambivalent, sometimes causing problems and sometimes not, with some teachers he is quiet and works well, whereas with others he has difficulty in completing work required. Although he has not improved academically, there are positive expectations of this as his attitude has changed and he is acquiring study habits.

3. WHY INCLUSIVE EDUCATION WORKS

With the aim of providing some concrete experience in this area, it was arranged for international experts to meet the teachers and pass on the applications of what had been developed from the two previous phases of the project to the particular school context. To this end, some of the project participants visited Murcia in May 2003 to observe activities in the centre under study.  

Teaching observation gave the participants a wide and qualitative view of the centre and the opportunity to deepen their knowledge of how staff was working to ensure that the education was, as far as possible, more inclusive

The visit specifically focused on two fundamental aspects: to learn how the Spanish education system was organised, particularly as it relates to Compulsory Secondary Education and attention to special needs (Arnaiz, 2000; Arnaiz and Soto, 2003) and secondly to find out how attention to diversity was carried through in the chosen centre.

Particular attention was paid to:

• Multicultural groupings that form part of the school’s policy in the Compensatory Education Programme. Different students, usually Moroccan, gypsy and sometimes from the majority culture, are brought together to receive Spanish classes to improve their communicative competence and use of this language. The main objective of this organisational strategy is compensation for inequalities and social disadvantage with which these students come to the school.
• Interventions directed at students with special education needs relative to intellectual disability or behaviour problems, from the second and third years of Compulsory Secondary Education, who require help with curriculum and behaviour issues. To answer their needs, curricular adaptations are provided for the students in need of them, as can be seen in the cases described above. Another measure employed in the first two years of secondary is that of “flexible groupings” whereby each class is divided into smaller groups (A and B) in given areas, according to the ability and competence level of the students in that the school believes they can thus better deal with different learning levels.

After observation, there were meetings of the management team, teaching staff and international experts to clarify some issues and give some of the experts’ impressions on the observed practice within the centre’s policy on dealing with diversity.

If we consider those elements that most clearly lead to the development of inclusive education according to the report on Primary Education from the European Agency for the Development of Special Education (2003), it can be seen that some are present in the school, although their focus does not have the inclusive nature it ought:  

• Collaborative learning. Co-ordinated work of several teachers with the same group of students helps performance. In the observed classes, two teachers were seen working together, though it would seem that this is not a common practice in this school.
• Pedagogic leadership. The motivation of the management team in dealing with diversity improves other staff’s involvement. It would seem that strong leadership is shown by the head that is accepted by the teaching body. However, the European experts believed that this leadership could be better taken advantage of to enable the centre to be more inclusive. Inclusion should be an issue discussed and shared by all the teachers, thereby generating internal motivation that would improve the attention to diversity among the education professionals involved.  
• Co-operative learning. When students work in co-operative groups each student benefits from their classmates’ progress. In the school, some types of co-operative work among students were seen in some session, specifically the students of different curricular levels or with different education needs.  
• Individual planning and flexible teaching. Opportunities for student initiative in learning and procedures, careful and precise curricular adaptation, as well as support for the teaching-learning process, favour the inclusion of special needs students. It would seem that curricular flexibility does not have high priority in this school in that the planning seems to be very much whole group directed.
• Flexible heterogeneous groupings. Work organised around flexible groups where diversity is catered for improves the performance of everyone. In this school the organisation of students into different groups according to their level of curricular competence is labelled flexible grouping, but in reality the internal make up is homogeneous and organisationally rigid. As a result, the group of experts believes that this policy on groups should be reviewed with the aim of improving the situation of students with special education needs.  

The experts believed that there are certain aspects of this school’s attention to diversity where there is clear room for improvement:

• Use of human and material resources: A lot of effort and resources are used to deal with special needs and more are constantly asked for. It would be useful to consider whether resources are well used or the same resources could be better employed.
• Peer involvement in the teaching process: a change of focus whereby the teacher ceases to be the centre of attention and peer learning is promoted can greatly encourage students with learning difficulties.
• The value of heterogeneity and difference: in spite of what is preached, there is a tendency to “group students with difference” and “homogenise” the groups in name of a claimed improvement in working conditions as much for the teachers as the students. In fact, the education value of difference and the wealth that heterogeneity as a resource for classroom learning brings, have not been understood.

From the observations carried out and discussions with the teaching body, there are certain aspects that encourage inclusive education in this school:

• Political will (legislative and administrative). There is an institutional impetus to deal with diversity. Both the education administration and the school itself putting a lot of effort and resources (material, human and organisational).  
• Pedagogic leadership. The management team and Orientation Department have much responsibility as catalysts for dealing with special education needs and as creators of team spirit to deal with difficulties in this sphere.
• Positive teacher attitude. Involvement of the teaching body in dealing with diversity substantially improves according to their attitude towards students with difficulties and in their own ability to make a difference to the teaching support of these students...
• Teaching support. Given that subject teachers do not consider themselves qualified to deal with diversity, being able to depend on advice and support directly brings about improvement in student working conditions.
• Training in teaching strategies. The adoption of a suitable methodology makes the difference between effective or ineffective response to the needs of each and every one of the students. A change from traditional methodology to other forms of teaching and learning can be enabled via teacher training and development programmes in new ways of classroom working.

In general, it is possible to conclude that the chosen centre is developing some of the strategies characteristic of inclusive education, but they are poorly focused and have not produced the intended result. However, after the experts’ visit and analysis of teaching, a change process would appear to have been set in motion that allows for optimism on the possibilities of developing inclusive education in the future.   

The Spanish experience, along with studies from and visits to other countries have enabled us to draw joint conclusions on the elements or factors that encourage the implementation of inclusive practice in Secondary Education classrooms and can be summed up as follows (EADSNE, 2004):

• Team Teaching. This arises when teachers work as a team and jointly seek strategies for dealing with diversity.
• Home-school system. Students do not change class and teaching is given by a reduced number of teachers.
• Co-operative learning. Co-operation among peers and group work improves learning and development as much in the cognitive as the socio-emotional sphere.
• Collaborative problem-solving. Tackling behaviour problems and classroom disruption through suitable problem-solving strategies improves the flow of classroom activities.
• Heterogeneous groupings. Heterogeneous groupings have been shown to be the best way of effectively helping students with learning difficulties to improve their performance.
• Effective teaching.   Rigorous evaluation and follow-up of the teaching-learning process combined with high student expectation create planning that aims for improved education quality for all students.  
• Alternative learning strategies. When faced with students who make no progress with the usual strategies, it is necessary to use new resources and support systems to ensure all attain education goals.

From these conclusions, the ways to lead education towards a more inclusive future, one that respects and values diversity, knows how to efficiently work with it so that all students progress and develop their abilities in a school belonging to everyone seem clear.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES

Ainscow, M. (2001) Desarrollo de escuelas inclusivas. Ideas, propuestas y experiencias para mejorar las instituciones escolares. Madrid: Narcea.

Arnaiz Sánchez, P. (2000) The integration into mainstream schools of pupils with Special Educational Needs in Southern Europe. In C. Brock ans R. Griffin (Ed.) International Perspectives on Special Educational Needs. Glasgow: John Catt Publication.

Arnaiz Sánchez, P. (2003) Escuela inclusiva: una escuela para todos. Málaga: Aljibe.

Arnaiz, P. and Soto, G. (2003) Special education in Spain at the beginning of the 21 st century: the challenge to educate in an equal and multicultural society. International Journal of Inclusive Education, vol 7(4), 375-388.

Ballard, K. (1997) Researching disability and inclusive education: participation, construction and interpretation. International Journal of Inclusive Education 1, 243-256.

Barton, L. (1997) Inclusive education: romantic, subversive or realist? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1, 231-242.

Booth, T., Ainscow, M.   (Ed.)(1998) From them to us. London: Routledge.

Dyson, A. (2001) Dilemas, contradicciones y variedades en la inclusión. En M.A. Verdugo Alonso; F.J. De Jordán de Urríes Vega (Ed.): Apoyos, autodeterminación y calidad de vida (pp. 145-160). Salamanca: Amarú.

European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2003) Inclusive Education and Classroom Practices.Summary Report. (www. european-agency.org).

European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2004) Inclusive Education and Classroom Practicesin Secondary Education. Summary Report. (www.european-agency.org).

Parrilla, A. (2002) Acerca del sentido de la Educación Inclusiva. Revista Educación, 327, 11-30.

Skrtic, T. (1991a) The Special Education Paradox: Equity as the Way to Excellence. Harvard Educational Review, 61(2), 148-206.

Skrtic, T.M. (1991b) Students with special educational needs: Artifacts of the traditional curriculum (pp. 20-42). In M. Ainscow (Ed.): Effective schools for all. London: Fulton.

Slee, R. (Ed.) (1993) Is there a desk with my name on it? The Politics of Integration. London: Falmer Press.

Stainback, W.; Stainback, S. (1999). Aulas inclusivas. Madrid: Narcea.

Professor Pilar Arnaiz was appointed Project Director in Spain by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport.

Austria,   Flemish Belgium, French Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Leetonia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Holland, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,   the United Kingdom.

Sweden, Luxemburg, Spain, Norway and United Kingdom.

Seven experts visited Spain including the project co-ordiantor, Cor Meijer. Their countries of origin are Holland, Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact