Stuck in failure: comparing special education needs assessment policies and practices in Sweden and Germany

Thomas Barow, Daniel Östlund
{"title":"Stuck in failure: comparing special education needs assessment policies and practices in Sweden and Germany","authors":"Thomas Barow, Daniel Östlund","doi":"10.1080/20020317.2020.1729521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The definition for special education needs (SEN) and the policies for its assessment varies widely between countries. This paper aims to investigate similarities and differences through a Swedish-German comparative approach. Based on the distinction between categorical and relational perspectives as expressions of specific thought styles, 58 SEN assessment reports from both countries were qualitatively analysed. The results demonstrate the maintenance of the categorical perspective in terms of focusing on the pupil’s ‘failure’. This result is even more notable in the German examples than the Swedish cases. Exceptionally and in both countries, a relational perspective emerges, taking teaching and the social environment into account. In conclusion, we suggest a flexible SEN approach with a stronger emphasis on the relation between the individual and the learning environment.","PeriodicalId":52346,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy","volume":"6 1","pages":"37 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729521","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT The definition for special education needs (SEN) and the policies for its assessment varies widely between countries. This paper aims to investigate similarities and differences through a Swedish-German comparative approach. Based on the distinction between categorical and relational perspectives as expressions of specific thought styles, 58 SEN assessment reports from both countries were qualitatively analysed. The results demonstrate the maintenance of the categorical perspective in terms of focusing on the pupil’s ‘failure’. This result is even more notable in the German examples than the Swedish cases. Exceptionally and in both countries, a relational perspective emerges, taking teaching and the social environment into account. In conclusion, we suggest a flexible SEN approach with a stronger emphasis on the relation between the individual and the learning environment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
陷入失败:比较瑞典和德国的特殊教育需求评估政策和实践
不同国家对特殊教育需求的定义和评估政策差异很大。本文旨在通过瑞典和德国的比较方法来探讨两者的异同。基于分类视角和关系视角作为具体思维方式表达的区别,对两国58份SEN评估报告进行了定性分析。结果表明,在关注学生的“失败”方面,分类视角的维持。这一结果在德国的例子中比在瑞典的例子中更为明显。在这两个国家,一种特殊的关系视角出现了,将教学和社会环境考虑在内。总之,我们建议采用灵活的SEN方法,更强调个人与学习环境之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
School autonomy with accountability as a cross-national policy model: diverse adoptions, practices and impacts. Pathways to higher education for vocationally qualified students. The case of Norway Education that lacks access to deaf experience: odd situations in Sweden Pathways to inclusive higher education: learnings from India’s National Education Policy 2020 Inclusion policies for social minorities in higher education: dialogue between the Brazilian and Nordic contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1