| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Lindqvist, Gunilla, et al.
(författare)
-
Different agendas? The views of different occupational groups on special needs education
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Special Needs Education. - London : Informa UK Limited. - 0885-6257 .- 1469-591X. ; 26:2, s. 143-157
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The purpose of the present paper is to investigate how different occupational groups explain why children have problems in school, how they believe schools should help these children and the role they believe that special educational needs coordinators (SENCOs) should have in such work. A questionnaire was distributed to all teaching and support staff in a Swedish municipality (N=1297). As a result, 938 persons (72.5%) answered the questionnaire. The answers given by (a) preschool teachers (b) teacher assistants (c) SENCOs (d) special teachers (e) class teachers and (f) subject teachers were compared. Several interesting patterns emerged from the data indicating that the occupational groups to a large extent have different ideas concerning how the school should work with children in need of special support. The SENCOs were, for example, the only group that believed that they should be involved in school development. The outcome of the study is discussed in relation to the notion of inclusive education.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lindqvist, Gunilla
(författare)
-
Who Should do What to Whom? : Occupational Groups´Views on Special Needs
- 2013
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The overall aim of this thesis is to increase our knowledge of different occupational groups´ views on work with children in need of special support. This is explored in four separate studies.The first study investigates the views of occupational groups in preschools and schools in one municipality. A questionnaire was handed out to all personnel (N=1297) in the municipality in 2008 (72.5 % response rate). The second study explores the views of educational leaders (N=45) in the same municipality. Questionnaire # 2 was distributed in 2009. All the educational leaders responded to the questionnaire. The third study describes the views of different occupational groups concerning special educational needs coordinators´ (SENCOs) role and work. This was highlighted by comparing responses from questionnaire #1 and # 2. Responses concerning SENCOs´ work were also added using a third questionnaire. This questionnaire was handed out in 2006 to chief education officers (N=290) in all municipalities in Sweden. The response rate was 90.3%. Finally, the fourth study presents five head teachers´ descriptions of their work with special needs issues. Study four was a follow-up study of questionnaire # 2. These head teachers were selected because of their inclusive values and because they seemed to be effective according to certain criteria. They were interviewed in January 2012.The results reveal a number of interesting findings. For example, there are both similar and different views among the occupational groups concerning work with children in need of special support. A majority of the respondents in all groups state that children´s individual deficiencies is one common reason why children need special support in preschools/schools. Differences between the occupational groups become especially visible regarding their views of SENCOs‟ work.Critical pragmatism (Cherryholmes, 1988) is applied as a theoretical point of departure. Skrtic´s (1991) critical reading and analysis of special education relative to general education is specifically used to interpret and discuss the outcome of the studies. Additionally, Abbott´s (1988) reasoning concerning the “division of expert labor” is used to discuss the occupational groups´ replies concerning “who should do what to whom”.The findings in the studies are contextualized and theoretically interpreted in the separate articles. However in the first part of this thesis (in Swedish: Kappa), the theoretical interpretations of the empirical outcome are discussed in more detail and the results are further contextualized and synthesised. Inclusion and premises for inclusive education are also discussed in more depth in the first part of the present thesis.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Wetso, Gun-Marie, 1955-
(författare)
-
Pojken med tidningarna
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Specialpedagogisk verksamhet i grundskolan. - Lund : Studentlitteratur. - 9789144068909 ; , s. 97-110
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 9. |
- Wetso, Gun-Marie, 1955-
(författare)
-
Teacher’s leadership and computers in the classroom : Combining theory and practice for development and learning in an R&D project
- 2013
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The article describes a Swedish research project (year 2010-2012) founded on classroom observations and conversations with teachers. The objective is to follow up work on implementing computers as a learning tool in three pre/primary classes and one secondary school class, whilst teachers take part in a university course on ICT-knowledge, special education and measures programmes. Activity theory is used to highlight the relationship between human, environment and activity and the needs and motives that bring about changes in the work (Leontiev, sv 1986). The study includes 15 primary teachers, two preschool teachers and five secondary school teachers. The results show that the teachers' thinking and acting changed over time to be more aware of the possibility to create an inclusive environment in the classrooms (Wetso 2012a). Some teachers showed that they (year one) could balance the challenge to meet the children’s different needs for learning with the computer as a learning tool as well as caring for the transformation of the school the be more inclusive. They took the pedagogical leadership and left it up to a kind of wellbeing process for the school and created a multi-learning environment in the school context. Second year many teachers changed their strategies to promote the children’s learning more successfully. Third year almost all teachers had changed their procedure in practice to be more inclusive. A few teachers still sort children in categories. They had difficulties to see their own leadership and effects of activities related to process making for learning. Keywords; ICT –knowledge, in-teacher training at university level, teachers’ leadership, special education, activity theory
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
