Advertisement

Effective Leadership for Inclusionary Practice: Assessment Considerations for Cognitively Challenged Students

  • Elaine FournierEmail author
  • Shelleyann ScottEmail author
  • Donald E. Scott
Part of the The Enabling Power of Assessment book series (EPAS, volume 3)

Abstract

This chapter focuses on leadership for effective inclusion for students with cognitive challenges. As leadership is pivotal to enhancing student outcomes, we explore how leaders influence teachers and promote inclusionary practices in terms of facilitating professional development and differentiation in instruction and assessment. Deconstructing two case studies in relation to the literature, we illustrate the complexities in addressing teaching and learning for inclusion, and highlight the importance of principals having an ethic of care and an appreciation of diversity. An inclusive leadership framework is proposed which articulates the essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes/beliefs principals and system leaders must acquire and refine in order to effectively lead in diverse schools and systems. In the exploration of the research, it was overtly evident that educators are grappling with differentiation and its implications for them as leaders of learning due to an inherent lack of preparation and pragmatic professional development. We therefore created two models designed to address the demand for building leadership capacity at the system and school levels that encompass leaders, educators, as well as paraprofessionals in the pursuit of enhanced outcomes for students with special needs. The foundation of the capacity building models is the development of a pool of expert leaders who can engage in peer coaching relationships, thereby influencing professional development and team-based case management. We advocate for closer community engagement between university experts and school systems, as well as a greater nexus between inclusion theory and practical pedagogical differentiation in preservice programmes.

Keywords

Inclusion Disabilities Exceptionalities Differentiated instruction Differentiated assessment Authentic assessment Differentiation Leadership development Professional development Knowledge, skills and attributes/values Capacity building Peer coaching System leadership School leadership Principals Community partnerships Case management Student voice Paraprofessionals Advocacy Ethic of care Appreciation of diversity 

References

  1. Al-Zyoudi, M. (2006). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education in Jordanian schools. International Journal of Special Education, 21(2), 55–62.Google Scholar
  2. Aspland, T., Datta, P., & Talukdar, J. (2012). Curriculum policies for students with special needs in Australia. International Journal of Special Education, 27(3), 36–44.Google Scholar
  3. Bausch, M. E., Quinn, B. S., Chung, Y., Ault, M. J., & Behrmann, M. M. (2009). Assistive technology in the individualized education plan: Analysis of policies across ten states. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 22(1), 9–23.Google Scholar
  4. Blue-Banning, M., Summers, J. A., Frankland, C. H., Lord Nelson, L., & Beegle, G. (2004). Dimensions of family and professional partnerships: Constructive guidelines for collaboration. Exceptional Children, 70(2), 167–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Browder, D. M., & Spooner, F. (2006). Teaching language arts, math, and science to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  6. California Postsecondary Education Commission. (2008). Overview of Governor Schwarzenegger’s proposed 2008–09 state budget (Commission Report 08-02, pp. 1–6). Sacramento, CA: California Postsecondary Education Commission.Google Scholar
  7. Carroll, D., Fulmer, C., Sobel, D., Garrison-Wade, D., Aragon, L., & Coval, L. (2011). School culture for students with significant support needs: Belonging is not enough. International Journal of Special Education, 26(2), 120–127.Google Scholar
  8. Cooper, P. (1996). Are individual education plans a waste of paper? British Journal of Special Education, 23(3), 115–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooper, J. E., Kurtts, S., Baber, C. R., & Vallecorsa, A. (2008). A model for examining teacher preparation curricula for inclusion. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(4), 155–176.Google Scholar
  10. Eskay, M., & Oboegbulem, A. (2013). Designing appropriate curriculum for special education in urban school in Nigeria: Implication for administrators. US-China Education Review, 3(4), 252–258.Google Scholar
  11. Fournier, E. (2012). Novice elementary teachers’ perspectives teaching mainstreamed special needs students: Implications for leadership, preservice education, and professional development. Unpublished Doctor of Education (EdD) thesis, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  12. Frankl, C. (2005). Managing Individual Education Plans: Reducing the load of the special educational needs coordinator. Support for Learning, 20(2), 77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  14. Giancreco, M. F., Edelman, S. W., Broer, S. M., & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities: Literature from the past decade. Exceptional Children, 68, 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goepel, J. (2009). Constructing the individual education plan: Confusion or collaboration? Support for Learning, 24(3), 126–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gökdere, M. (2012). A comparative study of the attitude, concern, and interaction levels of elementary school teachers and teacher candidates towards inclusive education. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(4), 2800–2806.Google Scholar
  17. Goor, M. B., Schwenn, J. O., & Boyer, L. (1997). Preparing principals for leadership in special education. Intervention in School and Clinic, 32(3), 133–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Government of Western Australia. (1999). Western Australian School Education Act, 1999. Perth, Australia: Western Australia Government Press.Google Scholar
  19. Gwernan-Jones, R., & Burden, R. L. (2010). “Are they just lazy?” Student teachers’ attitudes about dyslexia. Dyslexia, 16(1), 66–86. doi: 10.1002/dys.393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hadderman, M. (2001). School finance. Trends and issues (pp. 1–50). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  21. Hue, M. (2012). Inclusion practices with special educational needs students in a Hong Kong secondary school: Teachers’ narratives from a school guidance perspective. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 40(2), 143–156. doi: 10.1080/03069885.2011.646950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, PL-108-446, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et.seq.Google Scholar
  23. Irvine, A., Lupart, J., Loreman, T., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2010). Educational leadership to create authentic inclusive schools: The experiences of principals in a Canadian rural school district. Exceptionality Education International, 20(2), 70–88.Google Scholar
  24. Jones, K., & Bender, W. N. (1993). Utilization of paraprofessionals in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 14(1), 7–14. doi: 10.1177/074193259301400103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jordan, A. (2007). Introduction to inclusive education. Mississauga, ON, Canada: Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Joyce, B., & Calhoun, E. (2010). Models of professional development. A celebration of educators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar
  27. Killoran, I., Zaretsky, H., Jordan, A., Smith, D., Allard, C., & Moloney, J. (2013). Supporting teachers to work with children with exceptionalities. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(1), 240–270.Google Scholar
  28. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: University of Cambridge Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lawson, H. A., Claiborne, N., Hardman, E., Austin, S., & Surko, M. (2007). Deriving theories of change from successful community development partnerships for youths: Implications for school improvement. American Journal of Education, 114(1), 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. New York, NY: Wallace Foundation.Google Scholar
  31. Lindsey, B. (1986). PRIDE: Principals, resources, information and direction for excellence in special education. Paper presented at the 11th annual meeting of the National Council of States on Inservice Education, Nashville, TN.Google Scholar
  32. Lombardi, T. P., & Hunka, N. J. (2001). Preparing general education teachers for inclusive classrooms: Assessing the process. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(3), 183–197. doi: 10.1177/088840640102400303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lundy, L. (2012). Children’s rights and educational policy in Europe: The implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Oxford Review of Education, 38(4), 393–411. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2012.704874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McCray, E. D., & McHatton, P. A. (2011). “Less afraid to have them in my classroom”: Understanding preservice general educators’ perceptions about inclusion. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(4), 135.Google Scholar
  35. Montessori, M. (1967). The discovery of the child. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
  36. Ontario Education Act, R.S.O., CE.2, s.8 (3), Categories of Exceptionalities (1990).Google Scholar
  37. Ontario Education Act, R.S.O., CE.2 1990, c.7, Sch 9 AM (2007).Google Scholar
  38. People for Education. (2007). Annual report on Ontario’s publicly funded schools. Retrieved from: http://www.peopleforeducation.ca
  39. Peters, M. T. (1990). Someone’s missing: The student as an overlooked participant in the IEP process. Preventing School Failure, 34(4), 32–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Policy/Programme Memorandum No. 140. (2007). Incorporating methods of Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) into programmes for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Retrieved from: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/extra/eng/ppm/140.html
  41. Robertson, C. (2012). Special educational needs and disability co-ordination in a changing policy landscape: Making sense of policy from a SENCo’s perspective. British Journal of Learning Support, 27(2), 77–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9604.2012.01517.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scott, S., & Webber, C. F. (2008). Evidence-based leadership development: The 4L framework. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(6), 762–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Showers, B., & Joyce, B. (1996). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 12–16.Google Scholar
  44. Tearle, K., & Spandagou, I. (2012). Learning support policy in Australia (New South Wales) and New Zealand; Discourses of influence (pp. 1–14). Sydney, Australia: Australian Association for Research in Education.Google Scholar
  45. United Nations. (1989). UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations.Google Scholar
  46. Webber, C. F., Aitken, N., Lupart, J., & Scott, S. (2009). The Alberta student assessment study: Final report. Edmonton, AB, Canada: The Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
  47. Webber, C. F., & Lupart, J. (2011). Leading intercultural inclusive schools: An international perspective. International Studies in Educational Administration, 39(1), 3–18.Google Scholar
  48. Webber, C. F., & Scott, S. (2009). Leadership development in support of inclusive education in Ukraine. Leading and Managing, 15(2), 88–103.Google Scholar
  49. Webber, C. F., & Scott, S. (2013). Principles for principal preparation. In C. L. Slater & S. Nelson (Eds.), Understanding the principalship: An international guide to principal preparation (pp. 73–100). Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
  50. Webber, C. F., Scott, S., Aitken, N., Lupart, J., & Scott, D. E. (2013). Leading assessment for enhanced student outcomes. School Leadership & Management. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2013.773885.Google Scholar
  51. Weber, K., & Bennett, S. (2004). Special education in Ontario schools. Palgrave, ON, Canada: Highland Press.Google Scholar
  52. Woodcock, S., Hemmings, B., & Kay, R. (2012). Does study of an inclusive education subject influence preservice teachers’ concerns and self-efficacy about inclusion? Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(6), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BancroftCanada
  2. 2.Werklund School of EducationUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations