|
Elizabeth Stamopoulos
Edith Cowan University
This paper describes a Community Links Program (CLP) which preservice teachers completed as part of their third year early childhood Bachelor of Education course. The study examined preservice teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the CLP in challenging them to reflect on their values and beliefs and in preparing them for teaching. It required preservice teachers to undertake 25 hours of community service in order to engage in authentic recreational experiences with individuals with diverse abilities. It challenged them to critically reflect upon their own values and beliefs and embrace diversity through first-hand experience, interaction, reflection and discursive interpretation.
Preservice teachers were surveyed on the outcomes of their CLP and wrote reflective summaries on their experiences. The most notable outcomes noted by the preservice teachers were the building of positive attitudes towards people with disabilities, deeper knowledge and understandings of diversity, stronger partnerships with agencies and their clients, and greater confidence to develop more inclusive classrooms.
Keywords: preservice teachers, diversity, inclusive education, critical reflection, preservice teachers’ perceptions
Introduction
Both internationally and nationally, legislation and educational policies associated with inclusion have been developed to maintain the rights of all children in educational contexts. Such trends endorse the inclusion of children with disabilities in the least restrictive environment. However, although the principle of inclusion is now broadly accepted, the practice of inclusion is fast becoming a contentious issue, especially in instances where inclusive practices continue to marginalise children with disabilities.
Inclusion implies adaptations to all levels of education, including preservice education (Evans, 2004). Teacher educators now face the challenge of preparing preservice teachers to work in increasingly inclusive settings. In the Western Australian (WA) context, the importance of working with diverse student populations within regular classes is particularly heightened and clearly articulated in the recently published WA government report: Pathways to the future (Department of Education and Training Western Australia, 2004). WA teachers are required to include and support children with disabilities in their regular classes so they can access the curriculum and become actively involved in the school community. This means teachers require additional knowledge, skills and competencies specific to a wider range of diverse needs (Engelbrecht et al., 2001; Forlin, Jobling & Carroll, 2001).
The way teachers respond to this change will be critical. As indispensable agents of change, teachers are capable, at will, of enhancing or obstructing its success (Stamopoulos, 2003a). Teachers’ attitudes and behaviours are closely interconnected and act as significant predictors of their willingness to implement inclusive practices (Opdal, Wormnaes & Habayeb, 2001). Problems emerge when teachers are directed to embrace inclusion, regardless of their own personal beliefs (Forlin, 1995). Teachers whose beliefs and values clash with principles of inclusion, and who are unwilling to adapt their pedagogy to meet diversity of learning, often become a threat to the inclusion movement (Evans, 2004). Negative attitudes become barriers to inclusion because of their impact on children’s sense of belonging and acceptance (Gilmore, Campbell & Cuskelly, 2003). This frequently leads to interpersonal conflict, isolation and reluctance to approach others for assistance (McDougall et al., 2004; O’Brien, 2003). Teachers develop the climate of an inclusive classroom through their attitudes and interactions with children with disabilities (Carroll, Forlin & Jobling, 2003). When negative attitudes prevail, alienation, a sense of powerlessness, meaninglessness and social estrangement are frequent consequences of exclusion (Mau, 1992, cited in McDougall et al., 2004). In such instances, access does not always result in social acceptance or equal opportunities.
Closer collaboration among all stakeholders and people with disabilities is essential when developing an inclusive climate and culture of understanding, belonging and acceptance (Bennett, Deluca & Bruns, 1997; Forlin, 2004; McDougal et al., 2004; Opdal et al., 2001). Bramston, Bruggerman and Pretty (2002) endorse the importance of positive relationships and community integration as an effective means of promoting meaningful experiences and understandings of people with disabilities. They believe that, in order to achieve this, collaboration and partnerships with families, community agencies and other stakeholders are imperative. A study conducted both in South Australia and New South Wales reported that teachers required specific training in collaborative skills and processes in order to build quality partnerships with schools and the outside community. Insufficient training related to team-working skills impeded inclusion (Westwood & Graham, 2000).
Liaising and collaborating with people and organisations within and beyond the school context requires confidence, proficiency and a positive attitude towards inclusion (Carroll, et al., 2003; Foreman, 2005). Closer partnerships between teachers and community members are unlikely to be forged where open lines of communication are invisible and understandings of each stakeholder’s perspective are not evident (Foreman, 2005; Kemp, 2003). Sound knowledge and understanding of individuals with diverse abilities are required in order to develop social acceptance and support (Gartin & Jordan, 2001; Gilmore et al., 2003). A 2000 study by Disability Services Queensland (cited in Gilmore, Campbell & Cuskelly, 2003) found that people felt uncomfortable interacting with individuals with disabilities because of a lack of knowledge and understanding of their disability. For some teachers, inclusion is perceived as a complex task, making them less likely to adopt inclusive practices (Gartin & Jordan, 2001; Snyder, Garriott & Aylor, 2001).
Despite the continual move towards inclusive practices, there is much debate on how this can be achieved. Its success may well depend on the beliefs and attitudes of all stakeholders. It may be that optimal partnerships can be achieved only through teacher empowerment, knowledge and understanding, experience, discursive interpretation, reflection and reconceptualisation. On the other hand, quality educational programs for children with disabilities may remain dependent upon adequate teacher preparation, sufficient resources and support structures (Roll-Pettersson, 2001).
According to Opdal et al. (2001), teachers require knowledge and skills that empower them rather than provide them with comprehensive information about each disability. In their opinions, anxiety towards teaching children with disabilities is often linked to insufficient skills, time and support services. Jenkins (2002) warns that inclusive practices are achieved by overcoming barriers faced by people and organisations and that insufficient funding and lack of resources can transform people’s beliefs from advocates of inclusivity to opponents with the viewpoint that it is a continuing liability. O’Hanlon (2003) reveals how teachers need to be offered support through a discursive interpretation of issues, so they may construct their own ideological position and become key players in educational change. Critical analysis and reflection empowers teachers to elucidate beliefs in view of their discomfort or uneasiness (Liberman & Miller, 1999, cited in Kolar & Dickson, 2002). This is often seen as a sensitive way of examining unarticulated beliefs and listening to multiple perspectives. Teachers respond to change through the construction of a conceptual and behavioural position based on personal experience, reflection and interpretation of what is meaningful to them (Stamopoulos, 2001).
Teacher educators hold responsibility for providing preservice teachers with quality experiences which prepare them for teaching in diverse classrooms (Carroll et al., 2003). Preparing preservice teachers for inclusive teaching is not an easy task (Voltz, 2001). In many instances, preservice teachers enter training institutions with limited knowledge of inclusive practices or experiences of diversity (Kolar & Dickson, 2002) and report high levels of discomfort when interacting with individuals with disabilities (Forlin, 2003). Often there are no teaching practicums attached to their unit of study, making it difficult for them to gain practical understandings from programs often isolated from schools and the outer community. They often report a need to develop knowledge, skills and confidence through practice, reflection and collaboration with others, and through discussions of their experiences (Gartin & Jordan, 2001). According to Tait and Purdie (2000), training courses that are information-based have not been successful in creating more positive attitudes among student teachers. In their opinions, there is evidence to suggest that greater contact between preservice teachers and people with disabilities is more likely to result in successful inclusion when interactions are at an interpersonal level, that is between preservice teachers and individuals with disabilities (Tait & Purdie, 2000). In terms of a solution, ‘Just how to provide this contact, though, is another issue’ (Tait & Purdie, 2000, p. 37).
In search of a solution
In 2002, teachers, parents, community members, advocacy groups, people with disabilities, tertiary staff and preservice teachers met at Edith Cowan University (ECU) in WA to identify key competencies they believed were required for teachers to work in and foster inclusive school communities. One of the major outcomes of this forum was the suggestion that positive teacher attitudes and respect for others facilitate inclusion and could be achieved through stronger links between the university and the community. The most discussed strategy was the importance of enabling preservice teachers to meet people with disabilities, thus giving them an opportunity to develop an understanding and acceptance of the values behind the philosophy of inclusion (Forlin et al., 2004).
In 2004, four educational service programs were implemented to help foster positive attitudes towards people with disabilities. These were the Community Links Program (CLP), Collaborative Teacher Support Program (CTSP), Incursion Program (IP) and a Guest Speaker Program (GSP).
The CLP is an educational service program implemented across all core third-year special education units to all preservice teachers undertaking a Bachelor of Education degree in early childhood, primary, K–¬7 or secondary education. Preservice teachers are encouraged to engage in recreational activities, such as camps, movies, dinners and sporting activities with individuals with diverse abilities, through their voluntary participation in a community organisation. The purpose of the CLP is to first assist ECU preservice teachers develop a better awareness and understanding of the needs of people with disabilities and to identify potential barriers to them becoming involved in the inclusion movement. Second, help foster more positive attitudes towards individuals with disabilities by enabling interactions to occur in a non-threatening environment. Third, complement the current focus in WA and other states on inclusivity and provide a mutually rewarding activity for both ECU preservice teachers and community members with disabilities. Fourth, enable community members who have disabilities and frequently experience barriers to inclusion to expand their social and recreational activities and to be included more in community life (Forlin et al., 2004).
The study
The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which the CLP challenged early childhood preservice teachers to critically reflect upon their own values and beliefs and prepare them for teaching. The study was based on a qualitative paradigm of inquiry in which multiple methods, comprising a questionnaire, interview and document analysis, were used to gather data.
Participants
Data was gathered from 101 third-year early childhood preservice teachers who participated in 25 hours of CLP experience, working with individuals with diverse abilities. Of the 101 respondents, 99 were female and two were male. The preservice teachers were in the process of completing their first teaching degree. Ninety-three held no previous practical experiences working with individuals with disabilities, two had experienced disabilities of their own, while six had gained practical experience through their work with individuals with disabilities.
Instruments
Two instruments were used in the study: (a) a questionnaire, in which preservice teachers provided written responses to a set of questions related to their CLP experiences; (b) an interview (focus group or individual), in which preservice teachers clarified and elaborated on aspects of the questionnaire data. The questionnaire consisted of six open-ended questions of which three became the focus of this paper. A two-hour group interview was conducted with nine preservice teachers, and a one-hour individual interview with one teacher who was not available to attend the group interview. The interview questions were open-ended and based on questionnaire data with the intent of probing more deeply into preservice teachers’ responses and gaining insights into their perceptions. Data was taped, transcribed and presented to preservice teachers so as to ensure accuracy and reliability.
No adverse consequences were envisaged, as the questionnaire was anonymous and preservice teachers had received their final grade. Although the interviewer was their lecturer they should not have felt compromised.
Participation in the study was through the selection of two pathways. The first was the completion of an anonymous questionnaire. The second was through the completion of an identical anonymous questionnaire with the addition of an interview (consent form required). The study was approved by the ECU Ethics Committee.
Data analysis
Data collection, data analysis and the literature were intertwined and bonded through a flexible iterative process. Preservice teachers were encouraged to tell their story free of interpretation, through the completion of a questionnaire and/or interview. An analysis of preservice teachers’ CLP experiences was conducted to investigate their ideological positions towards diversity and the effects of the CLP in preparing them for teaching. Data was then analysed through a comprehensive ‘audit trail’ involving five stages: initial data analysis; inductive category coding and simultaneous comparing of units of meaning across categories; refinement of categories; exploring relationships and patterns across categories; and writing the paper.
The findings
This section of the paper presents and analyses data collected from questionnaires and interviews. Questionnaire data is presented in each of the three graphs and immediately discussed. Data from interviews is identifiable when preservice teachers are referred to as ‘interviewees’.
Preservice teachers’ critical reflections on their personal values and beliefs
Ninety-three of the 101 preservice teachers revealed that their CLP experiences challenged them to critically reflect upon their own values and beliefs; while seven reported no impact and one revealed the CLP had affected beliefs, not values.
Figure 1. Critical reflection on personal values and beliefs
Key
A Deeper understanding (65)
B Broke down fears, barriers (29)
C Strengthened beliefs and developed positive values (46)
D Changed attitudes (36)
E Viewed diversity through different perspective (8)
F Developed greater confidence (25)
Greater contact with people with disabilities enabled 65 preservice teachers to reach a deeper understanding of their daily experiences. In the words of one:
When I was at camp for six days and we were told you’re doing this for six days and this is the only time that parents have a break. One child had epilepsy and others had severe disabilities and some need more help than other. They needed help eating and drinking and going to the bathroom and were getting up five times a night and that’s what their parents were going through. This had an impact on me. Living with them and we were assigned children and one of the boys got up a few times a night and it was full on and there were some children who went to bed early and some children couldn’t sleep and it was part of their disability and the leaders got rostered on so you didn’t always get sleep. One person couldn’t do it for one week. The CLP gave you a deeper understanding of the day to day lives of these children.
For 46 preservice teachers the CLP strengthened beliefs and challenged them to reconceptualise their values: ‘Very successful. It had a huge impact on me, every day after dealing with people with disabilities my mind would be going to my values—altering them.’
A further 36 preservice teachers confirmed first-hand positive experiences altered their attitudes in that ‘previous bad experiences have been turned around’. For others, the CLP shattered fears and was: ‘Extremely successful. I was a nervous wreck before I began and had never worked with anybody with a disability and I even got a job out of the CLP so now I’m totally involved.’
For 29 preservice teachers the CLP challenged them to confront their fears. ‘It has challenged me to become involved & step outside my comfort zone. I have confronted my fears & misconceptions & found great rewards, challenge and a means to find out more.’
Twenty-five preservice teachers gained greater confidence working with people with disabilities and continually reflected on their experiences. As one elaborated:
I have always been scared of people (even children) who are ‘different’. I’m not sure why but maybe it is because of the values that I have been taught—e.g. ‘don’t stare’—my mum would say. Now I realise that communicating with people with disabilities is no different to those without.
Viewing diversity through the lens of others strengthened the learning journey of a further eight preservice teachers. According to two preservice teachers:
The program was good in giving us a chance to work with children with special needs not in a classroom situation. I would probably not have had that kind of experience without the CLP. Also allowed us to hear other people’s experiences during the tutorial sessions.
Felt as though we were doing something worthwhile for our community. Able to get a different perspective on some disabilities and special needs of aged people.
When data was presented to the 10 interviewees they confirmed it was reflective of their CLP experiences. One interviewee revealed that working in an educational context as opposed to a recreational context had provided limited interactions with children with disabilities and minimal opportunities for dispelling fears. Because of an administrative error this preservice teacher received late notification about the CLP requirements and requested permission to complete 25 hours in a childcare placement. The teacher admitted initial relief at being permitted to remain within one’s comfort zone but, at the conclusion of the 25 hours and subsequent to reflecting on peers’ experiences, felt ‘cheated’ by the loss of opportunities reflected on by others.
Perceptions of individuals with diverse abilities as a result of their CLP experience
Ninety-seven of the 101 preservice teachers reported their perceptions of people with diverse abilities had evolved as a result of their CLP experience, while four reported no change.
Figure 2. Changes in preservice teachers’ perceptions as a result of CLP
Key
A Acceptance of diversity and inclusion (47)
B Minimised fears/enhanced interactions (24)
C Greater knowledge of individual needs, qualities (30)
D Emphasis on abilities, not disabilities (12)
E Greater knowledge of availability of services (2)
F Strategies for coping (6)
G Not altered (4)
Forty-seven preservice teachers said their CLP experiences were a learning journey which involved continuous reflection, analysis, discussion and evolving of ideas. As one explained:
This unit has strongly forced me to review my attitude and beliefs and values. It brought home the fact that all children have rights and it is important to include all children. There are going to be children with special needs in classroom and it is our duty as teachers and people to do all we can to help their difficult journey through life.
Thirty preservice teachers who responded to the questionnaire found the CLP immersed them in the non-educational lives of people with disabilities, which produced stronger bonds and provided them with greater awareness and understanding of individuals’ daily needs. In a relaxed environment they valued their experiences with ‘children outside the classroom context. In a social setting rather than a teaching/learning setting. Had fun with the children without pressure’. Another preservice teacher recalled a real-life incident where a client was subjected to people’s biases ‘in a situation in a shopping centre that made me look closely at the way I view myself and special needs people’.
Twenty-four preservice teachers claimed the CLP improved their interactive skills, eliminated fears, and challenged them to reflect on prejudice and stereotyping. As one said, ‘Very challenging. Able to dispel fears and anxiety as to what to expect from the child. Unsure at first my role, child/children and what children’s needs would be, challenged stereotypes of SN [special needs] children—individual needs made clearer.’
The CLP showed 12 preservice teachers how to focus on people’s abilities rather than disabilities. A frequent response was: ‘Look at the person and not the disability—recognise what strengths they have and work on them.’ Recognising strengths rather than deficits resulted in one preservice teacher’s beliefs ‘evolving as I had previously had minimal contact with people with disabilities. I learnt to look past the disability and be comfortable interacting with the children.’
A smaller number of preservice teachers (6) developed strategies for ‘coping’ with children with disabilities. As one explained, ‘It has made me aware that I do feel uncomfortable in situations that are new. It has enabled me to build coping strategies and become more accepting of people with special needs.’ A further two preservice teachers were exposed to support structures which convinced them that inclusion could succeed if appropriate resources were provided. Their views changed from ‘having limited contact with special needs to having now some insight into the people and services available to help and what I can do to help’.
Four preservice teachers reported the CLP had not altered their beliefs. Two explained they had prior exposure to people with disabilities. One remained unconvinced he/she would cope in a normal classroom and explained: ‘The children I worked with had intellectual disabilities. On the weekend camp these children seemed fairly much like “regular” children. However, I’m unsure as to how I’d cope with their disabilities within a classroom.’ The fourth believed the CLP had strengthened rather than altered personal beliefs for the following reason:
I have a lot of experience being a mother of a child with a disability and worked as a TA [Teacher Assistant] in an Ed [Educational] support school and therefore found my attitude, values and beliefs and understandings did not change but were strengthened. I feel it is extremely important that this experience be continued in the Education degrees as I have in every year of my child’s primary years had teachers talk of their fear when knowing they were going to have my child. Also to observe the other preservice teachers and see their knowledge and attitudes change and grow fills me with hope for our special children coming into schools in the near future.
Ten interviewees confirmed the questionnaire data was reflective of their CLP experiences. As one confirmed:
It certainly changed my perceptions of diversity and inclusivity working with the kids. The very rewarding feeling that I got, others would get, especially kids in classrooms. It opened my eyes as to what they were capable of and that they had the same needs as everyone else. They may not be able to express it in the same way but they have those same wants and desires. For kids in the classroom they can learn from each other and gain strengths … and they can benefit hugely from wanting to aspire to what others have achieved.
Interviewees did, however, express surprise that four preservice teachers’ perceptions had not altered as a result of their CLP experiences.
The effectiveness of the CLP in preparing preservice teachers for teaching
Ninety-seven of the 101 preservice teachers said the CLP had been of benefit in preparing them for teaching, while four claimed it had made no difference.
Figure 3. Preparation for teaching
Key
A Support for inclusion (21)
B Prejudices/fears replaced by compassion/understanding (37)
C Importance of child/family support (17)
D Importance of peer support (7)
E Importance of partnerships with community agencies, families, schools (22)
F Growing knowledge of different disabilities/learning styles (22)
G Program development/implementation (12)
H No benefit (4)
I Skills in management and communication (19)
Thirty-seven preservice teachers said the CLP had provided them with important teaching qualities as prejudices and fears were replaced with confidence, compassion and understanding. Frequent comments were ‘I am not afraid any more’, followed by ‘they are as human as normal people and have feelings just the same as everybody else’. One preservice teacher’s perceptions captured the very essence of understanding through reflection: ‘To see the person as a useful part of my class, not as a hindrance or impediment to learning and growth.’ As one preservice teacher explained, the CLP ‘provided me with the confidence to be able to be comfortable with having child/children with special needs in my classroom’.
The importance of building strong collaborative partnerships with community agencies, families and schools was perceived by 22 preservice teachers as valuable preparation for teaching. Having experienced working and liaising with agencies, preservice teachers appeared more comfortable with these tasks. As one disclosed, the CLP had been ‘proactive in developing partnerships with family services and being aware of learning styles and flexible to help provide children with opportunities to learn to be the best they can be’. The CLP also showed ‘how inclusivity can be achieved with appropriate professional and paraprofessional help’.
Twenty-two preservice teachers stated they had gained new knowledge in terms of different disabilities and learning styles and ‘an insight to some of the people I might have in my class’. Consequently, they felt more ‘prepared to handle children with special needs have strats [strategies] to be aware of handling, preparing a situation’.
According to 21 preservice teachers, their support for inclusion was an outcome of their CLP experiences. ‘I will not be afraid of accepting a child with special needs in my class and look forward to working with children from whom I can learn so much about humanity and be grateful for all achievements, no matter how small they may seem.’
Sound communication and management skills were highlighted as important by 19 preservice teachers: ‘I have learnt how to work with children with special needs—communicating—behavioural management.’ Another revealed, ‘I have become more aware of those ppl [people] with disabilities and how I can incorporate them into both a c/room [classroom] and community situation and that I have the ability to cope with ppl [people] with disabilities.’
First hand knowledge of support structures for children and families was a beneficial outcome of the CLP for 17 preservice teachers. As one explained, ‘It exposes training teachers to disabilities and the resources available to help plan and implement programs to meet needs’.
Twelve preservice teachers improved their programming skills when CLP placements provided comprehensive planning for a range of functional and diverse skills. In these instances, ‘interaction with children with special needs—enabled effective future planning when we are in a teaching/classroom environment’. This knowledge was seen as transferable to teaching when ‘creating a learning environment that will maximise all childrens learning’.
An important outcome of the CLP for seven preservice teachers was witnessing the peer support provided to their university colleagues who had disabilities. As one elaborated, ‘I have further developed and gained more understandings of how people with disabilities function within our community and my values and beliefs have been strengthened by seeing the attitudes of the preservice teachers in this unit towards our peers/others with disabilities.’ This viewpoint was expanded upon by interviewees who explained that their greatest inspiration came from listening to the experiences of their peers with disabilities. ‘It helped make it more relevant to me to realise that in your own life you have people close to you experiencing these things.’
Four preservice teachers felt their CLP experiences were of no benefit to teaching. Two worked with adults, not children, and believed it would be difficult applying their knowledge to a teaching context. Another needed guidance in transferring knowledge to educational settings, while the fourth had past qualifications in this area but remained supportive of the value of the CLP for others.
Ten interviewees confirmed questionnaire data was reflective of their CLP experiences. However, they expressed surprise that four of their colleagues had gained no benefits from the CLP. In their opinion, ‘You could not experience the CLP and not learn anything new. Your prior experience would be slightly different to your CLP so you would have had to gain something. They’re probably the kind that knows everything all the time.’
Interviewees elaborated further on four issues raised in the questionnaire data: continued support for teachers working with children with disabilities; the value of CLP experiences with children or adults; issues pertaining to fear and discomfort; and sharing in the successes of their peers who have diverse abilities.
Interviewees believed that, for inclusion to succeed, a range of supports needed to be made available to teachers working with children with disabilities: educational support specialists; qualified teacher aides; professional development resources; reduced class sizes; and ‘troubleshooters’ who would enter classrooms, observe children and offer advice and support. One interviewee believed CLP experiences had showcased quality supports and highlighted a need for governments and policymakers to ‘provide … support for teachers otherwise inclusivity will collapse’.
There were mixed feelings amongst interviewees in terms of the value of CLP experiences when working with adults rather than children. Consensus could not be reached on whether CLP experiences should be restricted to children. In their opinion:
Working with adults didn’t prepare me for teaching as it was physically hard and I was at the cerebral palsy and we had two people. I found it really emotionally draining and I first spent two days with children with cerebral palsy and I feel I could relate to them. I found the adults hard—I couldn’t relate to them and it was physically hard and it sort of put me off inclusion and I felt I couldn’t cope with them. I felt that if this was inclusion then I didn’t want people that I couldn’t deal with forever. It’s unfair on them when I can’t give myself properly to them.
They weren’t kids but some of the people with Downs Syndrome are so loving and caring and you have this huge guy who is a man wanting to give you a cuddle and call you dad. I tell you it just really breaks you up but that’s the thing and I think from that perspective they’re adults and they’ve had lots of life-time experiences and they’re still childlike in their interactions and care and [need] love and support.
Interviewees discussed the range of avoidance strategies used by their peers in seeking out less-threatening CLP experiences. They ranged from selecting educational settings to working with children, not adults. They said the CLP had challenged them to reflect on their own values and beliefs and prepared them for teaching by providing them with experiences they may never have chosen. Their beliefs and values were further developed through critical reflection and sharing of CLP experiences during workshops.
One preservice teacher reported that the CLP had not only prepared her for teaching but also motivated her to begin researching and reflecting on her own disability. She subsequently wrote a poem which was published on the cover of the Spasmodic Torticollis Dystonia Magazine, and she was invited by the executive director to present the keynote address at the International Symposium on Spasmodic Torticollis—Dystonia in Florida, US. In a final lecture to her peers she described how her experiences in the early childhood special needs unit had become a significant turning point in her life, challenged her to reconceptualise her beliefs, and prepared her for teaching. Her concluding message was: ‘One day you may have the chance to touch a child’s life, and the experience they have with you may become a significant turning point that impacts on their life and their future.’ Interviewees believed this was a message they would continually reflect on throughout their teaching careers and was a further outcome of their experiences.
Discussion
To a large extent, the CLP has challenged preservice teachers to critically reflect upon their own values and beliefs and prepare them for teaching. The most notable outcomes for preservice teachers have been improved attitudes towards people with disabilities, deeper knowledge and understandings of diversity, stronger partnerships with agencies and their clients, and confidence in their abilities to succeed. Outcomes were drawn from CLP experiences which empowered preservice teachers to move beyond the inner circles of self, family, care and school towards the outer circles of community organisations and society. According to Tait and Purdie (2000), people with disabilities function within these three social circles: the inner circle of family and friends; the innermost circle of rehabilitation; and the outer circle of society. Data revealed that preservice teachers benefited from exposure to these contexts and gained deeper knowledge and understandings from first-hand experiences, critical reflections, discursive interpretations, and discussions of how people with disabilities interact, work, play and learn beyond the school and care setting. As a result, CLP experiences promoted an understanding that children’s learning is multidirectional and embedded in numerous contexts which cannot be ignored nor divorced from events which occur within school settings (Gartin & Jordan, 2001).
Opportunities to interact with people with disabilities, families and community organisations were provided as a result of the CLP. Consequently, preservice teachers developed confidence, formed strong partnerships with agencies and their clients, and experienced feelings of empowerment, all of which they believed to be important teaching competencies (Smith, Frey & Tollefson, 2003; Tait & Purdie, 2000). During their CLP experiences, preservice teachers’ competencies evolved and strengthened as they embraced diversity through practical experiences and understandings and reflections and interpretations rather than reliance on information about specific disabilities (Opdal et al., 2001; Tait & Purdie, 2000).
Preservice teachers’ values were primarily ‘attitude-related’ rather than ‘knowledge- or skill-focused’. Positive attitudes towards people with disabilities evolved from preservice teachers’ deeper understandings of diversity and inclusion. Negative attitudes emerged when CLP experiences did not dispel fears and anxieties or overcome barriers. In such instances inclusion was perceived as a continuing liability (Bennett et. al, 1997; Gartin & Jordan, 2001; Gilmore et al., 2003; Jenkins, 2002). As such, the conceptual and behavioural positions of individuals were ‘situated’ in the various contexts from which their experiences were drawn. The pressures they were subjected to forced them to re-evaluate their definition of change, focus on the projected costs and benefits to themselves and others, and construct a stance (Stamopoulos, 2003b).
Continuous reflections, discursive interpretations, and constructions of ideological positions enabled preservice teachers to clarify and reflect on their beliefs in view of their fears and anxieties about inclusion (Liberman & Miller, 1999, cited by Kolar & Dickson, 2002). This was evidenced in preservice teachers’ reports of their experiences. High-quality reflections emerged from listening to multiple perspectives (Kolar & Dickson, 2002) and were based on personal practical experiences, reflections and discursive interpretations (O’Hanlon, 2003). In some instances, preservice teachers reflected on their initial fears and subsequent choice of CLP placements by listening to the experiences of their peers. The CLP provided multiple perspectives across a wide range of community organisations that worked with people with disabilities. Preservice teachers prepared reflective reports of their experiences which were shared with their peers. Data clearly illustrated that increased contact with people with disabilities in a recreational context, in conjunction with reflection and discursive interpretation, led to lower levels of discomfort and apprehension. These findings are reiterated by Forlin, Jobling and Carroll (2001), who found that people felt initially vulnerable and apprehensive when interacting with people with disabilities, but that these feelings diminished with added practical exposure and understandings. A study by Disability Services Queensland, 2000 (cited in Gilmore, Campbell & Cuskelly, 2003) further confirmed that people experienced discomfort interacting with individuals with disabilities because they lacked knowledge and understanding of their disability. Snyder et al. (2001) found that when teachers were involved in teaching children in inclusive settings, their fears diminished.
This study has delved into the attitudinal constructions of preservice teachers towards diversity and inclusion through first-hand experiences working with people with disabilities in recreational settings. Data revealed interactions which had occurred in non-threatening environments and were interpersonal in nature, and had challenged preservice teachers to critically reflect on values and beliefs, embrace diversity and, in most instances, accept inclusion. These views were also reiterated by community organisations that confirmed the effectiveness of the CLP in challenging preservice teachers to critically reflect upon their personal values and beliefs. The Disability Services Commission of WA recognised the success of the CLP in challenging preservice teachers to reflect on their beliefs and awarded it the Making a Difference award. This innovative approach was later granted the Professionalism in Teaching and Learning Award and the Vice-Chancellor’s Teaching Award for its Services to Preservice Teachers and the Community (Forlin, et al., 2004). Ultimately, it inspired one early childhood preservice teacher to research her own disability and present a keynote address of her CLP experiences at the international Dystonia Symposium in Florida.
To date, there has been minimal research which targets the development of teaching programs that promote more positive attitudes and interactions between preservice teachers and people with disabilities (Carroll et al., 2003; Tait & Purdie, 2000). This is despite a growing body of literature which highlights the importance of positive attitudes towards inclusion and their impact on children’s learning (Bennett et al., 1997; Carroll et al., 2003; Evans, 2004; Forlin et al., 1999; Gartin & Jordan, 2001; Gilmore et. al., 2003; McDougall et al., 2004; Opdal et al., 2001). Data from this study confirms that enabling preservice teachers to meet with people with disabilities in non-educational settings can reduce their levels of discomfort and provide them with a deeper understanding and acceptance of the values behind the philosophy of inclusion.
References
Bennett, F., Deluca, D., & Bruns, D. (1997). Putting inclusion into practice: Perspectives of teachers and parents. Exceptional Children, 64(1), 115-131.
Bramston, P., Bruggerman, K., & Pretty, G. (2002). Community perspectives and subjective quality of life. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 49(4), 385-397.
Carroll, A., Forlin, C., & Jobling, A. (2003). The impact of teacher training in special education on the attitudes of Australian preservice general educators towards people with disabilities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(3), 65-79.
Department of Education and Training Western Australia (2004). Pathways to the future: A report of the review of educational services for preservice teachers with disabilities in government schools. Perth: Author.
Engelbrecht, P., Forlin, C., Eloff, L., & Swart, E. (2001). Developing a support programme for teachers involved with inclusion in South Africa. International Journal of Special Education, 16(1), 80-88.
Evans, P. (2004). Educating students with special needs: A comparison of inclusion practices in OECD Countries. Education Canada, 44(1). 32-35.
Foreman, P. (Ed.) (2005). Inclusion in action (3rd edn). Melbourne: Thomson Learning.
Forlin, C. (1995). Educators’ beliefs about inclusive practices in Western Australia. British Journal of Special Education, 22(4), 179-185.
Forlin, C. (2003). Involvement of students with intellectual disabilities. International Journal of Learning, 10, 318-325.
Forlin, C. (2004). Promoting inclusivity in Western Australian schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(2), 185-202.
Forlin, C., Tait, K., Carroll, A., & Jobling, A. (1999). Teacher education for diversity. Queensland Journal of Educational Research, 15(2), 207-225.
Forlin, C., Hammond, L., Stamopoulos, E., & Chambers, D. (2004). Community links: Working together to embrace diversity. Vice Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Teaching Institutional Award Category: Provision of Educational Services to the Community. Faculty of Community Services Education and Social Sciences School of Education Edith Cowan University.
Forlin, C., Jobling, A., & Carroll, A. (2001). Preservice teachers’ discomfort levels toward people with disabilities. Journal of International Special Needs Education, 4, 32-38.
Gartin, B. C., & Jordan, E. (2001). Perception of pre-service teachers about inclusion. Catalyst for Change, 30(3), 1-5.
Gilmore, L., Campbell, J., & Cuskelly, M. (2003). Developmental expectations, personality stereotypes and attitudes towards inclusive education: Community and teacher views of Down Syndrome. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 50(1), 65-76.
Jenkins, H. J. (2002). A continuum-based approach to inclusive policy and practice in regular schools. Special Education Perspectives, 11(2), 56-71.
Kemp, C. (2003). Investigating the transition of young children with intellectual disabilities to mainstream classes: An Australian perspective. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 50(4), 403-433.
Kolar, C., & Dickson, S. V. (2002). Preservice general educators? Perceptions of structured reflective logs as viable learning tools in a university course on inclusionary practices. Teacher Education and Special Education, 25(4), 395-406.
McDougall, J., DeWit, D. J., King, F., Miller, T. L., & Killip, S. (2004). High school-aged youths’ attitudes toward their peers with disabilities: The role of school and student interpersonal factors. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 51(3), 287-313.
O’Brien, P. (2003). Envisioning the future without the social alienation of difference. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 50(1), 17-38.
O’Hanlon, C. (2003). Educational inclusion as action research: An interpretive discourse. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Opdal, L. R., Wormnaes, S., & Habayeb, A. (2001). Teachers’ opinions about inclusion: A pilot study in a Palestinian context. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 48(2), 143-162.
Roll-Pettersson, L. (2001). Teacher perceptions of supports and resources needed in regard to pupils with special educational needs in Sweden. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36(1), 42-54.
Smith, S. J., Frey, B. B., & Tollefson, N. (2003). A collaborative cohort approach to teacher education: Modeling inclusive practices. Action in teacher Education, 25(1), 55-62.
Snyder, L., Garriott, P., & Aylor, M. W. (2001). Inclusion confusion: Putting the pieces together. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(3), 198-207.
Stamopoulos, E. (2003a). Elucidating the dilemma of P1 in Western Australian Schools: Towards a solution. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 4(2), 188-217.
Stamopoulos, E. (2003b). Principals’ and teachers’ stance towards P1 composite classes. Journal of Australian Research in Early Childhood Education, 10(2), 108-119.
Stamopoulos, E. (2001). School staff positions on P1 composite classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Edith Cowan University, Perth.
Tait, K., & Purdie, N. (2000). Attitudes toward disability: Teacher education for inclusive environments in an Australian university. International Journal of Disability, Development & Education, 47(1), 25-38.
Voltz, K. L. (2001). Preparing general education teachers for inclusive settings: The role of special education teachers in the professional development school context. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24(4), 288-296.
Westwood, P., & Graham, L. (2000). Collaborative consultation as a component of support for students with special needs in inclusive settings: Perspectives from teachers in South Australia and New South Wales. Special Education Perspectives, 9(2), 13-26.
AJEC Volume 31 No 4 December 2006, pp. 30-39.
You can purchase this issue of the Australian Journal of Early Childhood now.
If you liked this article, you can 'social bookmark' it with others who might be searching for good content on early childhood. This means you can share your favourite webpages with others, or just keep an online list of your bookmarks so you can access them on any computer.
Read more about social bookmarks
|
|
