Inclusive Education: an analysis of Italy and Spain schools

“Including But Not Limited To”.

Fostering Inclusion

in Italian and Spanish schools.

Fabio Dovigo e Anna Pietrocarlo

University of Bergamo, Italy

Cadiz, Sep/18/2012

This work examines the current evolution of
inclusive schools in Italy and Spain

through the analysis of two cases

Fabio Dovigo - Anna Pietrocarlo Cadiz, Sep/18/2012

The framework

The literature shows that the inclusive process
adopted in Spain and Italy has common features,
but also signiﬁcant differences.

(Gobbo, Ricucci, Galloni, 2011; Cornoldi, Terreni, Scruggs,
Mastropieri, 1997; Enguita, 2009; Cardona, 2009).


Common features

Support to Quality

Unidirectional
educational and

approach

policies

equity

no special schools, addressed to as key values for
one school for all students

promoting
children

with SEN

educational work


Differences

Levels of autonomy

Moderate

High

decentralization

centralization

(Spain)

(Italy)

Economic investments

Ethnic minorities,
socioeconomic Students with
disadvantaged students

disabilities

(Spain)

(Italy)


Both countries

+ but

-
carry out special interventions don’t
policies, measures leave a real mark
and practices on the way the
addressed to schools normally
speciﬁc categories plan and organize
of pupils

activities


Therefore

the ensuing scenario could be deﬁned as a

“fragmented inclusion”

What are the causes?


Research

Analysis of signiﬁcant cases

2 primary schools

Spain

Italy

The aim was not to produce a comparison, but to
highlight the strong and weak points of the inclusive
projects promoted by schools in each country


Spain

Situated in a
Characterized
Primary town of an
by a
schools Autonomous
population of
(nursery and 500 students, Community
more than
primary 30 teachers

(on the
50% of
education, age outskirts of
immigrants

3 to 12)

Madrid)


Italy

Primary and
Located in a
secondary Characterized
town with a
schools by a
680 students, population of
(nursery and population of
75 teachers

120.000, 40
primary 12% of
km northeast
education, age immigrants

of Milan

3 to 13)


Method

The research has been divided into two phases, bent to collect
both quantitative and qualitative data from the schools:

schools’ socio-economic and demographic background,

curriculum offered,

1

st database’ career,

phase

organizational structure,

and documentation about inclusive projects fostered by
schools;

focus groups,

semi-structured interviews,

2nd

classroom observations,

phase

and four questionnaires on-line adapted from the Index
for inclusion (Booth, Ainscow, 2011).


Why the Index for inclusion?

It allows to explore three major areas of school organization
and improvement:

1) creation of cultures,

2) production of policies,

3) development of inclusive practices;

It highlights the role of practices;

Its articulation makes great about the so-called implementation
phase, without which any document of school politics becomes
rhetoric and an instrument of propaganda.


Findings (Spain)

“[…] Cooperative learning has fostered
greater dialogue among teachers. Pupils
like it, but all depends on the background
of teachers implementing it… Some teachers
tend to dismiss it, so we run into
difficulties…” (Primary school teacher, 11/8/2012)

“[…] It must be said that in the classroom
there are so many different situations,
which can not be disregarded. So, we must
pay attention to a number of personal
dynamics…” (Head Teacher, 10/8/2012)


Children cooperate in playing and learning (teachers)

Los estudiantes aprenden de manera cooperativa (profesores)

Other

Otro 0%
Never

Nunca 0%
Rarely

vez
Rara 0%
Sometimes

A veces 24%
Often

A menudo 41%
Always

Siempre 35%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Durante las clases suelen trabajar en parejas o en pequeños grupos
Activities are organized in pairs or small groups (pupils)

(estudiantes)
Other

Otro 0%
Never

Nunca 2%
Rarely

vez
Rara 5%
Sometimes

7%
A veces
27%
Often

A menudo
58%
Always

Siempre
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Los profesores de apoyo promueven el aprendizaje de todos los
Supporting teachers promote learning for all children (teachers)

alumnos (profesores)
Otro 0%
Other

Nunca 0%
Never

Rarely

vez 0%
Rara
A veces
Sometimes

12%
A menudo
Often

18%
Always

Siempre 71%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Having unsupporting teacher in aula ayuda a all students to
Tener a profesor de apoyo en el class helps mí y a mis
accomplish their para hacer el trabajo (estudiantes)
compañeros work (pupils)

Other

Otro 0%
Never

Nunca 0%
Rarely

Rara vez 7%
Sometimes

A veces 12%
Often

A menudo 24%
Always

Siempre 57%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Teachers and parents/carers collaboratefamilias (profesores)
Existe colaboratión entre los profesores y las (teachers)

Other

Otro 0%
Nunca
Never

0%
Rarely

vez
Rara 0%
A veces
Sometimes

41%
A menudo
Often

47%
Always

Siempre 12%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Mi familia se siente involucrada en lo que sucede en la escuela
My parents/carers feel involved in school activities (pupils)

(estudiantes)
9%
Other

Nunca
Never

20%
Rara vez
Rarely

21%
A veces
Sometimes

20%
A menudo
Often

31%
Always

Siempre

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Findings (Italy)

“ […] School are not really able to integrate
from one level to the next… Many projects - and
the outcomes achieved - are generally not well-
known, nor valued as they deserve, even within
the same institution…” (School Deputy Director,
10/3/2011)!
!

“[…] I would like better relationships and
collaboration between all teachers in the class
council, including the support teacher. Our work
is rarely praised by colleagues…” (Primary school
teacher teacher, 1/20/2012)!
!

“[…] We must think about integration and… if we
want to be forward-looking, the inclusion of our
students… but first, we have to integrate
ourselves…” (Supporting teacher, 3/14/2012)!

Teachers collaborate between them (teachers)

100.00%

80.00%

60.00%

32% 43%
40.00%

20.00% 20%
4% 1%
0.00%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6
Always

Often

Sometimes Rarely

Never

Other

Teachers collaborate between them (pupils)

100%
80%
60%
34% 30%
40%
17%
20% 10% 4% 6%
0%
Sempre
Always

Spesso
Often Qualche volta Raramente

Sometimes Rarely

Mai

Never Other
Other


School encourages children and adults to feel alright with themselves (teachers)

100%
80%
60%
43%
40% 32%
20%
20%
4% 0% 1%
0%
Always

Often

Sometimes Rarely

Never

Other

La scuola helps me to feel alrightme stesso (studenti)
School mi aiuta a star bene con with myself (pupils)

100%
80%
60%
35%
40% 19%
22%
14%
20% 7% 4%
0%
Sempre Spesso Qualche volta Raramente Mai Other
Always

Often

Sometimes Rarely

Never

Other


Children learn in a cooperative way (teachers)

60% 49%
50% 38%
40%
30%
20%
10% 2% 8% 3%
0%
0%
Sempre

Always Spesso
Often Qualche volta

Sometimes Raramente
Rarely

Mai
Never

Other
Other

During lessons I often work in pair or small groups (pupils)

60%
50%
38%
40%
30% 19% 23%
20%
6% 7% 7%
10%
0%
Sempre
Always

Spesso
Often Qualche volta

Sometimes Raramente
Rarely

Mai

Never Other
Other


Supporting teachers promote -

learning for all children (teachers)

50%
36%
40%
30% 21% 22%
20% 13%
7%
10% 2%
0%
Sempre
Always

Spesso
Often Qualche volta

Sometimes Raramente
Rarely

Mai
Never

Other
Other

Having a supporting teacheralcune lezioni mi aiuta a svolgere tomio
Avere un insegnante di sostegno in in class helps all students il
lavoro (studenti)
accomplish their work (pupils)

50%
39%
40%
30%
24%
20%
9% 10% 10%
10% 7%
0%
Always

Sempre Often
Spesso

Sometimes
Qualche volta Rarely
Raramente

Mai

Never Other

Other

-
Adults and children are sensitive to different expressions of gender (teachers)

50% 40% 41%
40%
30%
20% 11%
7%
10% 1% 1%
0%
Sempre
Always

Spesso
Often Qualche volta

Sometimes Raramente
Rarely

Mai
Never

Other
Other

-
Being gay or lesbian is seen as a normal part of life (pupils)

50%
40%
30%
19% 22% 21% 19%
20% 11%
8%
10%
0%
Always

Sempre Often
Spesso

Sometimes
Qualche volta Rarely
Raramente

Mai

Never Other

Other

Outcomes

Our inquiry conﬁrms the fragmented condition of
inclusive processes in both countries.

The measures adopted to promote inclusion
produce only partially positive results.

Nevertheless, results are worse than it could be
expected, especially because the projects address to
integrate speciﬁc groups of pupils (immigrants,
students with disability), rather than adopting
inclusion as a global view about school.


Critical points

1

Focus on SEN

The view contrasting normal with special needs
students is still commonly accepted.

As a result, inclusion is not fully understood as
involving all students and the overall school
organization, rather than addressing some special
groups.


Critical points

2

Connection between inclusive projects and

school organization

The tie between inclusive efforts and school
organization is weak.

Inclusion is developed through single projects,
which sometimes work quite well, but rarely
affect the school organization as a whole in a
permanent way. Schools prove to be quite
impermeable to inclusive change.


Critical points

3

Teachers’ training

Inclusion is not seen as a core part of
teachers’ education and continuous training
yet, but rather as an optional skill.

Therefore, the qualiﬁcation levels of school
personnel managing inclusive projects are
not standardized, and efﬁcacy can widely vary
according to the teachers’ turn over.


Suggestions

1

Focus on SNE

Could we change the focus from special needs to
exclusion, removing the obstacles to the full
participation and learning of all students?


Suggestions

2

Connection between inclusive projects and

school organization

Is it possible to “make a pact” between schools
inclusion-oriented and the administration (local
or central)?

The pact would be: let the schools free to
achieve low cost (or no cost) changes which can
leave a permanent mark on the whole
organization.


Suggestions

3 Teachers’ training

-  Continuous training should be made
compulsory for teachers.

-  Inclusion should be introduced as a core
subject in education and refreshing courses.

-  Teachers’ traineeships could be hosted by
schools which developed inclusive best
practices.

Is that enough to leave a mark?


dovigo@unibg.it

anna.pietrocarlo@unibg.it

University of Bergamo, Italy

Inclusive Education: an analysis of Italy and Spain schools

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Inclusive Education: an analysis of Italy and Spain schools

Similaire à Inclusive Education: an analysis of Italy and Spain schools (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Inclusive Education: an analysis of Italy and Spain schools