理论是全纳的,实践是融合的?教育界关于全纳的讨论

IF 1.3 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs Pub Date : 2024-09-09 DOI:10.1111/1471-3802.12720
Silvia Sierra‐Martínez, Irene Crestar, Isabel Fernández‐Menor, Ángeles Parrilla Latas
{"title":"理论是全纳的,实践是融合的?教育界关于全纳的讨论","authors":"Silvia Sierra‐Martínez, Irene Crestar, Isabel Fernández‐Menor, Ángeles Parrilla Latas","doi":"10.1111/1471-3802.12720","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Defining educational inclusion is a complex task on which there is still no conceptual agreement among practitioners. Although the term inclusion has moved away from integration or disability, it has not yet been consolidated as the presence and participation of all students. Some of the reasons are lack of material and human resources, isolated curriculum or teacher training, among others. A qualitative research project was carried out with the aim of identifying the portraits that the different informant agents make of inclusion. The technique used to collect information was an open interview with 44 participants, representatives of different groups (head teachers, classroom teachers, specialists, counsellors, families, students, associations and politicians). The information was analysed using the content analysis model, supported by MAXQDA22 software. The results delve into (1) the dissonant issues with inclusion and (2) the rupture they perceive between legislation and daily practice, and (3) reveal five dominant discourses on the concept: as a legal measure, as a category, as an educational measure, as wealth and as participation. In conclusion, the vision of inclusion in this study remains confused, diffuse and utopian.","PeriodicalId":46783,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theory is inclusive, practice is integrative? Discourses on inclusion in the education community\",\"authors\":\"Silvia Sierra‐Martínez, Irene Crestar, Isabel Fernández‐Menor, Ángeles Parrilla Latas\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1471-3802.12720\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Defining educational inclusion is a complex task on which there is still no conceptual agreement among practitioners. Although the term inclusion has moved away from integration or disability, it has not yet been consolidated as the presence and participation of all students. Some of the reasons are lack of material and human resources, isolated curriculum or teacher training, among others. A qualitative research project was carried out with the aim of identifying the portraits that the different informant agents make of inclusion. The technique used to collect information was an open interview with 44 participants, representatives of different groups (head teachers, classroom teachers, specialists, counsellors, families, students, associations and politicians). The information was analysed using the content analysis model, supported by MAXQDA22 software. The results delve into (1) the dissonant issues with inclusion and (2) the rupture they perceive between legislation and daily practice, and (3) reveal five dominant discourses on the concept: as a legal measure, as a category, as an educational measure, as wealth and as participation. In conclusion, the vision of inclusion in this study remains confused, diffuse and utopian.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12720\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12720","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全纳教育的定义是一项复杂的任务,从业人员在概念上仍未达成一致。尽管全纳一词已不再是融合或残疾的代名词,但它尚未被统一为所有学生的存在和参与。其中一些原因是缺乏物质和人力资源、孤立的课程或教师培训等。我们开展了一个定性研究项目,目的是确定不同信息提供者对全纳的描述。收集信息的方法是对 44 名不同群体的代表(校长、班主任、专家、辅导员、家庭、学生、协会和政治家)进行公开访谈。在 MAXQDA22 软件的支持下,采用内容分析模型对信息进行了分析。分析结果深入探讨了:(1) 与全纳有关的不和谐问题;(2) 他们认为立法与日常实践之间的脱节;(3) 揭示了有关全纳概念的五种主要论述:作为一种法律措施、作为一种类别、作为一种教育措施、作为财富和作为参与。总之,本研究对全纳的认识仍然是混乱的、分散的和乌托邦式的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Theory is inclusive, practice is integrative? Discourses on inclusion in the education community
Defining educational inclusion is a complex task on which there is still no conceptual agreement among practitioners. Although the term inclusion has moved away from integration or disability, it has not yet been consolidated as the presence and participation of all students. Some of the reasons are lack of material and human resources, isolated curriculum or teacher training, among others. A qualitative research project was carried out with the aim of identifying the portraits that the different informant agents make of inclusion. The technique used to collect information was an open interview with 44 participants, representatives of different groups (head teachers, classroom teachers, specialists, counsellors, families, students, associations and politicians). The information was analysed using the content analysis model, supported by MAXQDA22 software. The results delve into (1) the dissonant issues with inclusion and (2) the rupture they perceive between legislation and daily practice, and (3) reveal five dominant discourses on the concept: as a legal measure, as a category, as an educational measure, as wealth and as participation. In conclusion, the vision of inclusion in this study remains confused, diffuse and utopian.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs (JORSEN) is an established online forum for the dissemination of international research on special educational needs. JORSEN aims to: Publish original research, literature reviews and theoretical papers on meeting special educational needs Create an international forum for researchers to reflect on, and share ideas regarding, issues of particular importance to them such as methodology, research design and ethical issues Reach a wide multi-disciplinary national and international audience through online publication Authors are invited to submit reports of original research, reviews of research and scholarly papers on methodology, research design and ethical issues. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs will provide essential reading for those working in the special educational needs field wherever that work takes place around the world. It will be of particular interest to those working in: Research Teaching and learning support Policymaking Administration and supervision Educational psychology Advocacy.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Parents' lived experiences regarding the decision‐making process on reasonable accommodations for their child with SEN—An IPA analysis Trends in instructional technologies used in education of people with special needs due to intellectual disability and autism Teachers' relational competence towards students with neurodevelopmental symptoms: A microscopic relational analysis Theory is inclusive, practice is integrative? Discourses on inclusion in the education community
×
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