Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress
International
Special Education Conference
Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity?
1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland
about the conference
programme
registration
accommodation
contact
|
Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress 1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland |
home about the conference programme registration accommodation contact |
Assist. Prof. Dr. Hakan SARI
Selcuk University, Egitim Fakultesi, Meram. Konya. 42090. TURKEY
hakansari@hotmail.com
Abstract
Turkish Special Education Legislation 573 (1997) intended to ensure the right of every handicapped student to an education in the ‘least restrictive environment’, a phrase often interpreted to mean in a regular classroom in schools. Deaf students encounter challenges to their academic success in the mainstreamed class ranging from teachers who are unaware of unresponsive to the needs of deaf learners (Eripek, 2004). The quality of social interaction experienced by deaf students in the mainstreamed high schools varied widely (Sari, 1993 and 2000). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to learn about mainstreaming from the perspective of the deaf who are currently educated in mainstream vocational high schools. The sample of this study consists of 21 students. Semi structured interview techniques were used to gather the data for this study. The interview questions included classroom experiences, interaction with teachers, and participation in school activities and relationships with other students. The data were analysed in accordance with the content analysis technique which helps the researcher to have in-depth analysis and rich verbal descriptions on the issues the students faced in the schools.
I. Literature
The vast majority of children who have hearing loss are integrated into mainstream education in Turkey (Baykoc-Donmez, and et al. 1997; Kaya, 2003; Sari, 2004). Integration is identified within a process of assimilation of deaf students into the hearing world (Polat, 1995; Tufekcioglu, 2002). Deaf students need to be valued for what they can do and for the way in which they naturally function for there to be any real progress in acceptance (Nola and Tucker, 1998; Whitaker, 1994). Deaf students have problems with speech and literacy (Tufekcioglu, 2002). All of these create greater pressure on the student to develop skills in that is, not only is the mainstream education is inaccessible but the supposed support service is also presented in an accessible form (Sari, 2004; Webster and Sterrit, 1999). It becomes acceptable to examine which curriculum is suitable for the hearing impaired student rather than asking how can we fit the hearing impaired student into a traditionally delivered curriculum. The more the deaf child the poorer the performance it would be expected that integrated hearing impaired students would be academically more accomplished than non-integrated students (Livingston, 1997). According to Mashie (1995), the integrated students would have better communication skills than the non-integrated students and that the social maturity of the integrated students, including attitudes towards schooling, would be more developed. These integrated students may come from families with specific ethnic and economic characteristics (Sousa, 2001). The more normal the school setting the greater the academic achievements of the hearing impaired (Akçamete and Ceber 1999). In Turkish schools, some deaf students have not developed the appropriate social skills as they are expected because they have very little contact with other children (Sari, 2004; Lynas, 1994). However, the main aims of the integration are enhances social integration through the deaf children being educated with children from their own neighbourhood, to facilitate the development of language by provision of a normal language environment. It also allows access to the wider curriculum of the mainstream school. Although there are major difficulties of individual integration from the beginning, the real difficulties arise when they reach secondary school. Secondary school results in a tremendous upsurge of pressure. They have to study many subjects for example more than ten subjects every year - most of which are new. They may try hard for a little while, but the strain can be too much and they may spend most of their time avoiding the teachers’ eyes in case the teacher ask them a question, or hiding the fact that they asleep behind the textbook.
Integration refers to the practice of teaching pupils with SEN in the regular setting instead of placing them at a separate institution (Kirk and et al. 2002). This mainstreaming is expected to stimulate interaction and cooperation between the hearing impaired students and their peers and to counteract isolation, segregation and stigma. Integration has both ideological and empirical roots (Akcamete and Kargin, 1999). Ideologically it is linked to normalisation and can be seen as an expression of a more general social movement toward equality and equality of opportunity. Empirically, integrative ideas were stimulated and supported by research studies (Akcamete, 1999;Whitaker, 1994) which have evaluated special classes and have found positive effects to be uncertain. It is anticipated that all children and students can be educated more in natural environments and situations.
In the Turkish education system, essential goal of education is to help students to develop a positively realistic self-concept. This goal needs to be given particular attention when dealing with having impaired students. Self-esteem can be seen to be based on satisfaction for those personal characteristics and activities which are most valued personally. Sari (2003) suggested that for the fully integrated group, physical concept was relatively independent or other areas of self concept including general self concept, which might be related to self-esteem.
Important requirements for successful integration are summarised as the following, such as:
Under the United Nations Convention ratified by the Turkish Republic in 1990’s, deaf students as the others have a right to be helped to achieve the greatest possible degree of self reliance and social integration (Turkish Prime Ministry-Directorate Office for the Disabled, 1999). The United Nations declaration does not come down unequally of the side of either integrated or segregated provision, rather it emphasises the students’ rights to provision which will develop all their capabilities to the fullest extent. It is not enough to place all children in the ordinary school, integration is a matter of school reform, not the students’ placement and involves a process of valuing and celebrating individuals, not judging all against one standard (normality) (Hallahan and Kauffman, 1997).
According to the Turkish legislation 573 (1997), if a student has special educational needs because of disability or learning difficulties the child has a right to an education in an ordinary school which meets the children’s needs in ordinary school where possible. In Turkey, there are a number of studies focusing on the specific aspect of integration is relatively limited and probably less than similar research in the field of other categories in special education. Therefore, the aim of this study is to examine the reflections of deaf adolescents in high schools about their integration into the schools. The second reason is to light other researchers on this issue.
II. Research Methods
II. 1. Research approach
In this research, qualitative research design was used because the researcher want to have depth and rich information about the integration of deaf adolescents in Turkish high schools, as recommended in Powney and Watts (1997), and Bogdan and Biklen (1992). The second reason to use the qualitative research design was that there was not a research on this issue in Turkey
II. 2. Sampling
Twenty one high school deaf students were selected for this study because these students were educated in mainstreamed high schools in Konya. The subjects participated in this research were congenitally deaf and hearing loss varies between 70 and 110 decibels. Twelve subjects had hearing aids. There was no report for other disability conditions from the students. Non of the students’ parents have hearing loss according to the students’ reports.
II. 3. Research Instruments
The data were collected by using the unstructured Interview forms, which were developed by the researcher after the literature reviews. The form had one question starting with ‘what are the advantages and disadvantages of your integration to this school. After asking that question the researcher made a note of the subject’s explanations with the help of sign language interpreters.
II. 4. Data analysis
The data were analysed after collecting the data from the interviews of the students with hearing impairments with the help of the content analysis. With this technique, the data collected were read again and again and made notes of key words indicating the main matters and these are written opposite side of the paper. Then, all the key points were collected from each paper and then the same issues were counted for; frequencies and percentages of the responses, After this, the quotations from the transcripts were placed into the paper.
III. Findings
The findings drawn from this study are presented in this section.
I. Pupil grouping
According to many students’ reports (15: %72), irrespective of how the classroom furniture was arranged, teachers should be aware of advantages – and disadvantages –of allowing all pupils complete freedom of choice over where to sit. While not wishing to discourage the development of friendships, teachers should want to ensure that all deaf students derive benefits from the educational opportunities provided. They considered that pupils with hearing impairment should sit about six to ten feet (2-3 meters) from the teachers and slightly to one side. The students considered that a position at the end of the second row in a traditionally arranged room is about right so that the pupil can easily turn the face another pupil who is speaking. A seating position with a major light source behind or to the side of the hearing impaired is ideal so that the light can fall on teachers’ faces and make lip-reading easier. Organising group work with deaf students seated around a table or block of desks is felt to be a particularly successful way of drawing in hearing impaired students who may be reluctant to contribute to class discussion. In practical and craft lessons, where students are moving about the room, a buddy is often assigned to work with a hearing impaired or deaf students primarily to draw their attention to class announcements. Pupil –pupil interaction is an accepted and valuable part of a child’s educational, social and emotional development and such should often be actively encouraged by the teacher. Discovery learning techniques, peer tutoring and topic work all should require pupils to work together in planning and discussing activities. These are some comments coming from the students:
‘Teachers should be aware of the advantages of students grouping ways with which all the students are able to see each other easily’ (Student 8).
‘Students’ grouping is important for us to be able to work together, with my classmates’ (Student 17).
II. Noise Factors and Illumination
Twenty students (%95) reported that in most classrooms, a certain level of working noise is tolerated particularly where pupils are using a variety of resources or working on group tasks. According to the students, few classrooms are carpeted and not many have curtains. According to the students, low level of working noise can cause problems for pupils who rely on hearing aids because all sounds are picked up and amplified by an aid and it is very difficult for a student to discern and sift out those sounds upon which he/she should act from all those reaching his/her ears. Teacher should make special effort to keep students still and quiet when instructions are being given of that those with a hearing impairment can focus on attention on what is being said. With the help of visual clues as a child with a impaired hearing, they will listen with the eyes as well as his ears. Some comments from the students are:
‘We cannot understand what the teachers say about the lessons’ contents if we cannot perceive due to having very much noise in the classroom’( Student 17).
III. Attitudes of the Students towards Integration
According to sixteen students’ (%76) comments, much of the success of integrating students into the mainstream is due to the attitude and personality of the students, their willingness to try new tasks Some comments are:
‘Some friends have positive and some do not have positive attitudes towards this education way because some hearing friends and teachers do not understand what we need and what resources we need and what kind of help we need in the classroom and in the school environment….’ (Student 13).
‘We are not hearing students. We are supposed to be hearing students who hear and see the messages coming from the teachers but we have only one way to understand the course’ (Student 21).
IV. Cooperation with other staff
Twenty students (%95) stated that subject and class teachers should discuss topics and identify key concepts together with specialist staff and to involve classroom and welfare assistants in the preparation of resource materials whenever possible. In this way, maximum use can be made of all available on site expertise. They reported that although it is time consuming they felt that preparing materials for pupils with hearing impairment may cause the students to think through and reappraise their teaching. In secondary school, where deaf pupils are taught in the mainstream one of the teachers reviewed and radically changed his teaching approach to take account of the deaf pupils students. That is, the teachers should plan to make sure that the teacher always face the class when speaking to them. All teachers should adopt the practice of building up blackboard summaries and of printing new words on the board and explaining their meaning with the help of collaboration. Some comments are:
‘Our teachers sometimes do not collaborate with each other. They should know which subject may be beneficial or useful in the student’s life’ (Student 7).
‘Collaboration should be seen vital for deaf students. They do not know how to explain new words (students 13).
V. Preparing Teaching materials
For many pupils with hearing impaired (14: %67), the preparation of simple worksheet summarising major points, explaining new or specialist terms and instructions and drawing simple diagrams were perceived as vital for deaf students. Particularly at secondary level, as the students reported, teachers should give the students some opportunities to make self confidence to work independently in class, at home, work assignments and in follow up support lessons. The students emphasised that feedback is a vital element not only in integration but also throughout the time a student is in the mainstream. For those who were hearing impaired the strain of having to watch the teacher while trying to make notes should be reduced or removed. Some comments from the students are:
‘Teachers should know the advantages of teachers’ preparation using the new materials to motivate us’ (Student 13).
‘Teachers should give a feedback to us. Then, everything can be clear and understandable in the classroom’ (Student 19).
VI. Pupils’ needs
Seventeen students (%81) reported that, in any class, there will be a range of abilities and aptitudes represented but there are other factors which teachers should bear in mind when preparing and presenting materials for pupils with SEN. For example, some students cannot receive the same level of visual or auditory stimulus as their hearing peers and can experience a delay in cognitive development that is apparent in their relatively limited vocabulary and their restricted level of conceptual understanding. According to them, some students with hearing impairment may have poor articulation and can be hesitant to speak up in class. A quotation from the students’ comments is:
‘Teachers should understand that all students have different needs but we have more differentiated needs at school’ (Student 19).
‘We have vocabulary cause limitations which, negative effective on our understanding’ (Student 4).
VII. Peer Tutoring
More than half of the students (12: %57) stated that peer tutoring on the buddy system often operates very informally as pupils develop friendships within which some of their learning needs are met particularly at secondary level. There was considerable evidence of pupil’s sensitivity to the needs of friendship in mainstream schools. For example, friends provide verbal comments and interpretations of films and slides, they read blackboards notes aloud, help set up and pack away equipment. Helpers in the classroom should ensure that a student’s notes should be up to date and should be checked that homework tasks should be fully understood. Some comments are:
‘We learn many things from our friends. Some hearing students are very much volunteer to help us learn’ (Student 7).
‘Sometimes I really need hearing students’ to help to make the notes clear and understandable (Student 15).
VIII. Feelings of not accepted
Most of the hearing impaired students (19: %90) expressed their feelings of being an outsider in a variety of contexts:
‘I feel myself left out. I don’t talk to them (hearing peers) for important reasons –just to chat’ (Student 2).
‘It’s sort of like an outsider coming in (to the group) and like it’s quite hard to get accepted… it’s certainly still a problem in some (groups) (Student 6)
‘If hearing people don’t understand the deaf, deaf people just tell them Oh, don’t worry, it is not important’ and they say it all again but try to make it shorter to see if they can understand’ (Student 9).
IX. Access and Support
Fifteen students (%71) expressed some reservations in this area; for example,
‘I don’t want too much support because it’s loads of pressures on me. I don’t want that. I like to be like the hearing people in the school… but I like to have a little support. While I’m having help I feel like it’s cheating’ (Student 1).
However, on the whole most students (18: %86) felt that the unit was right for them.
I’m right here because there is hearing people and deaf people. If I went to a deaf school I am not sure whether I can get support as I get here’ ( Student 4).
X. Teachers
More than half students (14: %67) stated that the qualities of their teachers are appreciated by the students. They have friendliness, a willingness to listen and make time to listen, and generally treating everyone equally. According to the students, some teachers attempt to understand student difficulties. Conversely, some students’ comments demonstrated that their teachers have lack of understandings and empathy on the students’ life.
‘All the teachers are different, not bad, they are all different’ (Student 3).
Generally usually they are quite good to pupils. If something goes wrong it’s only human nature to get annoyed (Student 12).
XI. Friendships
More than half of the students (16: %76) reported difficulties in making and maintaining friendships at home due, to the long distance they lived from the school. Although they were generally quite positive in their comments about their mainstream peers, there were some negative comments too:
‘Though I’m deaf, some people take the mickey out of me…it gets me upset, it’s like bullying’ (Student 11).
‘I’ve got two people in my class who say horrible things’ (Student 8)
The deaf students become confused and disturbed about friendship sometimes:
‘I am an introvert, that’s it. I can’t follow things. But that is not because I am deaf. They told me I wasn’t deaf just that I can’t hear very well. So if I can’t follow it must be because I’m thick. That must be true because I can never think of anything to talk about to others except football. So that’s what it is.’ (Student 1).
XII. Size of the classes
Most of the students (17: %81) remarked on the size of the school and the large classes. Some students (9: %43) said that they had enjoyed school and everything connected with it; others said they liked everything ‘except the work’
Some made light on their initial difficulties, for example:
‘It was a bit tough at first… it was a bit spooky getting through the door and sitting the next to a load of them that you’d never seen before… after a while it just faded off’ (Student 10).
V. Discussion
The opportunity to express their views seemed to be very much welcomed by all of the students concerned and in the main they were ready and able to discuss their feelings across a wide range of areas. While some generalised conclusions might be cautiously drawn from the, interviews- for example, there is support for the case for more locally based units –the overriding impression gained was of the unique individuality of each of the students. As students stated, all teachers are different, so too were the students in this group. While this may appear to be a rather trite if not obvious conclusion, the very different combinations of perceptions, emotional responses and abilities to reflect on their educational experiences revealed in these interviews quite dramatically underpins the essential need to treat all such students, no matter how similar their disabilities may appear , first and foremost as unique individuals in their own right as stated in (Hyde and Power , 2004).
Reflecting on the main purposes of the investigation, it can be said that overall the interviews revealed a number of areas in the practice of the facility and particularly with reference to hearing impaired students, which might be improved. However the majority of the student evaluations of the services they received from the facility and school were positive although some of them have negative perspectives on the opportunities provided for them in the mainstreamed schools. There is always a danger that such a positive outcome may lead to complacency of the staff in either provision. Because of the essential uniqueness of students with hearing impairment referred earlier, however, such complacency is to be assiduously avoided. In the dynamic, ever changing population and context of any school community nothing can be more stultifying. Any school which seeks to meet the needs of all students should identify, address and constantly review the perceptions and evaluations of each of its pupils as individual human beings. The hearing impaired children attending ordinary schools in the present study show significantly better levels of social and emotional adjustment than their peers in special schools. The findings are of particular interest in the light of the present emphasis on integration of the handicapped into ordinary schools with its suggested benefits for the hearing impaired being both social, emotional and academic. Conditions in the schools may be more favourable for integration. However, further research may be required to ascertain whether the teachers of mainstream school children perceive and evaluate the behaviour of their pupils differently from teachers of special secondary schools for the hearing impaired children.
It is noted that different schools vary considerably with regard to integration policy and practice. There are schools clearly oriented toward integration, schools with historical adherence to special schools and schools with no extensive debate integration as stated in Reed (2002). In fact, the impact of integration has given varying and complex information. The results in this study reflect that being together with non hearing impaired peers in the regular settings makes the hearing impaired child more aware of his disability and restraints. Psychological factors may be effective on a positive self-evaluation are activated to higher degree in the integrated environment. In comparison with their heterogeneity, the impact of the type of school placement along the dimension of mainstreamed school –full integration in regular class seems to have minor weight. If the handicap is severe, integration is considered difficult, and possible only with a rich supply of teaching materials, reduced class size and support from specialist.
According to Stinson and Whitmire (2000), educational integration has profound effect not only upon life in classrooms but also on other aspects of school organisation and teaching: namely pupil grouping, curriculum structure, staffing timetabling, pastoral care provision, the physical layout of the school, availability of ancillary help, links with specialist agencies, resource provision, the organisational and academic structure, the attitudes of staff and pupils – all of these interact to provide an environment in which students with hearing impairment are educated. In addition to completing academic tasks, the student has a need to be accepted as a social member of the teaching group and to be as independent in this situation as possible. Interaction with other students is important and the arrangement of furniture within the teaching area can do much to maximise these opportunities. Classroom design and layout have obviously greatest importance for these students whose mobility is restricted and for those who require the use of items of special equipment.
VI. Conclusion
The findings in this study reflected that students with hearing impairment were more likely to hoard things, both at home and at school. The findings may also reflect a conscious strategy but these students seemed to organise and structure their activities. Such structuring can avoid frequent communication difficulties, and might also reflect enduring patterns of thought that have developed partly as a result of this impairment. Receptive communication problems are likely to limit their abilities to negotiate within socially shared activities and from a Vygotskian perspective we might therefore expect to see individuals appropriately involving shared resources even when working alone.
VII. Implications for Practice
After having the analysis of the findings the recommendations are proposed for this study as the following:
REFERENCES
Turkish Special Education Legislation 573 (1997). The Ministry of National Education, Directorate of Special Education, Guidance and Counselling Services, Ankara: The Ministry of National Education Publication
Akcamete, G. (1999). ‘Improving question skills for students with hearing impairment’, The European Journal of Special Needs Education, 4(2), 171-177
Akcamete, G.; Ceber, H. (1999). ‘Kaynastırılmış sınıflardaki isitme engelli ve isiten ögrencilerin sosyometrik statülerinin karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesi’, Ozel Egitim Dergisi, 2 (3) ,64-74
Baykoç-Donmez, N.; Aslan, N.; Avci, N. (1997). Ilk ve Orta Ogretim Kurumu Ogretmenlerinin Engellilere ve Kaynastirmaya Iliskin Gorusleri, IV. Ulusal Egitim Kongresinde Sunulan Bildiri
Bogdan, R. C.; Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative Research for Education: An introduction to theory and methods (2nd edition). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Eripek, S. (2004). ‘Ozel Egitime Muhtac Ogrencilerin Ihtiyaclarinin Karsilanmasi (Unpublished Master Course Notes), Anadolu University, The Institute of Educational Sciences
Hallahan, D.P.; Kauffman, J.M. (1997). Exceptional Learners: Introduction to Special Educational Needs, (7th Edition), London: Allyn and Bacon
Hyde, M.; Power, D. J. (2004). Inclusion of deaf students: An examination of definitions of inclusion in relation to findings of deaf students in regular classes (Unpublished Paper), Australia: Griffith University, Education Faculty, The Centre for Deafness Studies and Research in the School of Education and Professional Studies.
Kaya, U.(2003) İlköğretim Yöneticilerinin, Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin ve Rehber Öğretmenlerin Kaynaştırma Ile Ilgili Bilgi, Tutum ve Uygulamaların Incelenmesi (Yüksek Lisans Tezi) Ankara: Gazi Üniversitesi.
Kirk., S. A.; Gallagher, J. J.; Anastasiow, N. J. (2002). Educating Exceptional Children. Boston. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company
Livingston, S. (1997). Rethinking the Education of Deaf Students: Theory and Practice from a Teacher's Perspective. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lynas, W. (1994). Communication options in the education of deaf children. London: Whurr Publications.
Mahshie, S. N. (1995). Educating Deaf Children Lingually. Washington, DC: Pre-College Programs.
MEB (2000). ‘Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Özel Eğitim Rehberlik ve Danışma Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü Özel Eğitim Hakkında Kanun Hükmünde Kararname ve Özel Eğitim Hizmetleri Yönetmeliği’ Ankara: MEB basımevi.
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB). (2000). ‘Ozel Egitim Hakkında Kanun Hukmunde Kararname ve Ozel Egitim Hizmetleri Yönetmeligi’. Ankara: Milli Egitim Basımevi.
Nola, M.; Tucker, I. (1988). The hearing impaired child and the family. London: A Condor Book Souvenir Press (E&A)
Polat, F. (1995). ‘Isitme engellilerin egitiminde kullanilan yontemler ’ Özel Egitim Dergisi, 2(1), 24-32.
Powney, J.; Watts, M. (1997). Interviewing in Educational Research. London: Rutledge and Kegan Paul
Preston, P. M. (1994). Mother father deaf: Living between sound and silence, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Reed, M. (2002). Educating Hearing Impaired Children in Ordinary and Special Schools, Milton Keynes: Open University
Sari, H. (1993). ‘Social and Emotional Development of Deaf Adolescents in Turkey’ (Unpublished MA by Research Thesis), England: University of Warwick
Sari, H. (2000). ‘An Analysis of Policy and Provision for Children with Special Educational Needs in England and Turkey’ (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis), England: Oxford Brookes University, Westminster Institute of Education
Sari, H. (2003). Contemporary Approaches for Teaching Children with Special Educational Needs, Ankara: PegemA Publication
Sari, H. (2004). ‘The hearing Impaired Children’ (Unpublished Master Course Notes), Konya: Selcuk University, The Institute of Social Sciences
Sousa, D. A. (2001). How the Special Needs Learn. California: Corwin Press.
Stinson, M. S.; Whitmire, K. A. (2000). ‘Adolescents who are deaf or hard of hearing: A communication perspective on educational placement’,Topics in Language Disorder, 20, 2, 58-73.
T.C. Basbakanlık Ozurluler Idaresi Baskanligi, (1999). Cagdas Toplum ve Ozurluler, Ankara: I. Ozurluler Surası Komisyon Raporları Genel Kurul Gorusleri-
Tufekcioglu, U. (2002). ‘Isitme Yetersizlikleri’, in S. Eripek (Ed.) (2002). Ozel Egitim: Acıkögretim Fakultesi Okuloncesi Ogretmenligi Lisans Programi, Eskisehir: Anadolu Universitesi Yayını, No: 1411.
Ure, O. (2003). The Psychology of Deafness (Unpublished Master Course Notes), Selcuk Universitiy, The Institute of Social Sciences.
Webster, A.; Sterrit, M. (1999). Special Needs in Ordinary schools, London: Cassell
Whitaker, P. (1994). ‘Mainstream students talk about integration’, British Journal of Special Education, 21 (1), 13-16
home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |