The pedagogic signature of special needs education

Weiß, Sabine; Kollmannsberger, Markus; Lerche, Thomas; Oubaid, Viktor; Kiel, Ewald

doi:10.1080/08856257.2014.895554

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this context, it seems that the main barrier preventing both educational institutions and schools from being organizations attentive to diversity lies in reviewing the pre-established ideas, norms and beliefs in force in the school, as well as functioning patterns and agents involved in teaching and its associated processes [6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Descriptive Study on the Training and Attitude of Future Teachers towards Educational Inclusion

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Spanish educational system has heterogeneous and diverse students that have increasing learning needs. All this has forced it to reinvent itself, designing and applying a model of inclusive education that serves to offer a higher quality educational response to these students. One of the main pillars for achieving this challenge is the teaching staff. The aim of this study is to evaluate the training and attitudes of future teachers to work in inclusive educational environments. The present research had a sample of 245 future teachers in the degrees of Early Childhood Education and Primary Education, who answered the Teacher Training Evaluation Questionnaire for Inclusion (CEFI-R), specific to the object of study. As the main conclusions, we obtained that the perception of future teachers towards the concept of inclusion is positive and that the training they receive is adequate, although there is room for improvement. However, there is a need to adjust the curriculum, increase the period of practice and better coordinate the actions of the members involved in the educational process.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Descriptive Study on the Training and Attitude of Future Teachers towards Educational Inclusion

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the basis of the above, we can conclude that the main barriers that prevent schools from truly attending to diversity are the ideas, rules, and beliefs in force in the school, the patterns of functioning, and the agents involved in teaching (Ahmmed et al, 2014;Weiß, Kollmannsberger, Lerche, Oubaid & Kiel, 2014). In a similar vein, in her study on teachers' attitudes, Grieve (2009) divided teachers into three groups: those who taught inclusively if they had the necessary support, those who considered that inclusion can harm students who have no difficulties, and lastly, those who thought that students who have difficulties due to social, emotional, or behavioral causes require higher quality support than regular schools can offer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Development and validation of a questionnaire to evaluate teacher training for inclusion: the CEFI-R

González-Gil¹,

Martín²,

Baz³

et al. 2019

AULA_ABIERTA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In its conclusions on the social dimension of education and training, the Council of the European Union (2010) identified three essential challenges for all the educational systems of the 21st century: (1) social inclusion should, by means of education and training, ensure equal opportunities of access to quality education; (2) it should provide key competences to all students and especially to those who have to deal with educational disadvantages and special needs of support; (3) access to high quality educational opportunities and services should be ensured for all. In this vein, many investigations emphasize the benefits of inclusion for all students (Dias & Cadime, 2016; Donnelly

show abstract

“…The majority of papers (n = 17) also represented learning in Higher Education (HE), with only four relating to learning in the primary and secondary phases of education (Table 4); although some papers written in the HE context also focus on Teacher Education and relate to beginning or experienced education professionals in the primary or secondary sectors (Parker et al, 2016;Totterdell et al, 2011;Weiß et al, 2014).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The last two articles in final sample (Osmond & Tovey, 2015;Thomson & Hall, 2015) were included as directly relevant to the second research question (RQ2), focusing on implications for design and technology education. Lynch et al (2019), Parker et al (2016), Schrand and Eliason (2012), Peel (2011), Hyland and Kilcommins (2009) Abstract 18 Love and Barrett (2019), Lynch et al (2019), Hall and Thomson (2017), Noel and Liub (2017), Caldwell et al (2016), Parker et al (2016), Spronken-Smith et al (2016, Osmond and Tovey (2015), Sowbel and Miller (2015), Thomson and Hall (2015), Domakin (2014), Weiß et al (2014), Boling et al (2013), Asghar (2012), Schrand and Eliason (2012), Zambo and Isai (2012), Totterdell et a...…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a signature pedagogy for design and technology education: a literature review

McLain

2021

Int J Technol Des Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on the work of Lee Shulman, this article reviews literature exploring the concept of signature pedagogies, which are described as having have surface, deep and implicit structures. These structures are complex and changing; concerned with habits of head, hand and heart. Emerging from professional education and now being explored in STEM and Humanities education, they are characteristic forms of teaching and learning that are common across a sector. Common themes emerge from within a range of disciplines including art, built environment, design, music, religious, social work and teacher education. These include the roles of the curriculum, the teacher, the learning environment, as well as capability, uncertainty and the challenges associated with signature pedagogies. Focusing on literature from design education, the paper explores the nature of signature pedagogy in design and technology, as a tool for professional discourse. The conclusions propose a discursive framework for design and technology education in which the structures are tied together by the three fundamental activities of ideating, realising and critiquing; more commonly thought of as designing, making and evaluating. The deep structure being project-based learning, undergirded by the implicit values and attitudes associated with design thinking; including collaboration, creativity, empathy, iteration and problem solving. Design and technology education has something unique to offer the broad and balanced curriculum through its signature pedagogies and the way that knowledge is experienced by learners.

show abstract

The pedagogic signature of special needs education

Cited by 8 publications

References 22 publications

A Descriptive Study on the Training and Attitude of Future Teachers towards Educational Inclusion

A Descriptive Study on the Training and Attitude of Future Teachers towards Educational Inclusion

Development and validation of a questionnaire to evaluate teacher training for inclusion: the CEFI-R

Towards a signature pedagogy for design and technology education: a literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About