1 / 17

Ordinary Schools are Different

Ordinary Schools are Different. The Pobal HP Index of Affluence and Deprivation ( Haase and Pratschke , 2012):  a systematic approach to targeting resources towards greatest need Margaret Egan MIC Research Showcase 2013. Inclusion. Background. Problem space –

dian
Download Presentation

Ordinary Schools are Different

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ordinary Schools are Different The Pobal HP Index of Affluence and Deprivation (Haase and Pratschke, 2012):  a systematic approach to targeting resources towards greatest need Margaret Egan MIC Research Showcase 2013

  2. Inclusion Background • Problem space – • Anecdotal evidence formulated the… • Research Questions • Needs/resource match dilemma • Inclusiveness of Inclusive Schools

  3. Methodology Critical Pragmatism Conceptual Framework

  4. Claims unearthed from the Thesis • Claim One: Discursive features of policy text provide ‘Spaces for Manoeuvre’ to recreate policy intention • Claim Two: Context of Practice: Where Policy Text is Captured – Policy Intention is Recreated • Segregation: “withdrawal is just the norm” • Distribution of students from LSES differs across ordinary schools • Intersectionalitybetween Social Class and Special Education Placement • Demand on the GAM differs due to SES • Claim Three: ADilemma within the Dilemma – today’s ‘solutions’ tomorrow’s ‘problems’ • Need to systematically target resources at greatest need

  5. Claim Two – Ordinary Schools are DifferentIntersectionality of LSES and Special Education

  6. Values from the HP Index (Haaseand Pratschke, 2012)

  7. Summary: Policy Intention is Recreated in the Context of Practice Local Notions of Dis/Ability • Policy is ‘enacted’ by the social professionals in the Context of Practice • Social professionals have the power to order children in school. • Local constructions of dis/ability’ is based on a psycho-medical perspective which is underpinned by teacher habitus (Bourdieu, 1984), and is • built on faulty assumptions that pathologises School Ordering Social Class Margaret Egan. MIC

  8. Overrepresentation – Why? Local Construction of Disability ‘you are supposed to start with what they know and build from there, whereas what you found was that they know so little’ Mary, Principal Girls’ School • “…they come from homes where they haven’t been taken to developmental clinics… it’s a lack of education on behalf of the parent….A huge amount of parents here would not be aware of the level a child should be at…” Eibhlín, Principal Boys’ School,

  9. Deficit Discourse • “they need so much extra help because they are not getting any help at home” (Carmel, L.S. Teacher Girls’ School) • “…having significant difficulty…going back generations, I would have whole family histories and I would say to the class teacher give them simple work…” (Áine, L/S teacher, School C, Mixed School) • “… not having anyone who thinks that education is important…” (Mairéad, Principal Mixed School) • … They may have the ability but there is no expectation from home…(Freda, the L/S/Resource teacher in School A, the Boys’ School) Margaret Egan. MIC

  10. School and Home are Two Worlds – Home/School Discontinuity is not Disability “…..it’s a bit like Roddy Doyle, you nearly have to come from their world…the curriculum is a middle-class curriculum and that’s it…” “…….a middle class environment and all the wonderful work and all the wonderful ideas, you were really rocking with them…Oh even their stories were so creative because they read so much…and I see how easy it is for them to learn and be in the system” Margaret Egan. MIC

  11. Contribution to Theory

  12. Contribution: Local Construction of Dis/Ability based on Faulty Assumptions grounded in Deficit Discourse A norm is constructed in the system. ‘Non-normative’ students are provided with the EXIT RAMP

  13. The Challenge for Inclusion • ‘The mix between socioeconomic backgrounds… you have far more work to do if you are trying to marry the children who deserve to have a more challenging curriculum and the children who need to be supported with the basic curriculum… there is more need for teacher input, there is far more need for some recognition of that need, allocation on the basis of that need’ • M.E. ‘Is it marrying the children with SEN or marrying the children coming from differing social classes?’ • ‘The two social classes, absolutely, it’s very difficult’.

  14. Support to Harmonise the Disconnect • “Parental Employment, living in, owning your own home, and all those kind of things… How many of you read to your child … Those factors have a huge, huge, huge bearing… I know myself this year I have a 6th class that come from that type of background environment, where education is cherished and promoted… and I have the opposite scenario in my fifth class – they are lucky to get in the door in the mornings… and maybe have a lunch… and half a uniform… I consider that those children need support from us • (Mary, Principal Girls’ School) Margaret Egan. MIC

  15. A Different Type of ‘Ordinary’ “We can take pupils up to the 40th and then review it and see how they are getting on… I suppose we are lucky too Margaret, we are in a very advantaged school and honestly we wouldn’t have that many that would be going out in accordance with the circular, about three or four at most scoring below the 10th percentile out of 418 pupils overall” (L.S. Teacher, Dec.2010) Margaret Egan. MIC

  16. Contribution to Policy: Ordinary schools are not the same • “…the disadvantage of the GAM is that it is a "general" allocation to every school and does not depend on the needs of a particular area, you have no say in it, the school itself has no say in what hours they can get… Schools are all different you can't just say a general allocation for everybody.....” (L.S. Teacher Girls’ School). • ‘Allocation of special needs resources in schools should be based on the research’ (Irish Times, Aug. 15th 2013), which evidences need.

  17. Directions to Negotiate Dilemmas • Recommend use of Pobal HP Index to target resources towards greatest need • Focus on Home/school discontinuity – transition programmes/ community-based programmes to rebalance agency • Social arena of context of practice is complex. Recommend ITE and CPD to ensure that the social professionals are competent to engage in critical practice to negotiate dilemmas, critical reflection of their own habitus/the field • Consider Policy as an evolving cycle, more flexible, dynamic approach to provide for multi-sectoral interconnection and community based services with feedback loops to inform each ‘reframed context’

More Related