Inclusive education: A proposal for a theoretical framework to evaluate the quality of inclusion

Quote

Giampietro, L, Poliandri, D., Romiti, S. (2019, June 6-8). Inclusive education: A proposal for a theoretical framework to evaluate the quality of inclusion [paper presentation]. Education and Post-Democracy – 1st International Conference of the Journal «Scuola Democratica», Cagliari, Italy.

Description

School evaluation can be an important opportunity to promote school-inclusive change. Through evaluation, schools can increase their capability to provide an equitable, high-quality education for all and become more skilled at responding to the differences of individual learners (EASNIE, 2017). In order to support schools in using data to inform decisions, INVALSI has developed a framework focused on three dimensions: context, processes and outcomes (INVALSI, 2014) and a set of indicators that support the schools. According to the latest INVALSI studies (Freddano et al., 2018; Poliandri et al., 2019) the framework developed (RAV) is not completely exhaustive to evaluate the processes of school inclusion. Furthermore, the Italian law (d.lgs 66/2017) requires INVALSI to develop new indicators to evaluate quality of school inclusion. This contribution presents a proposal for a theoretical framework and related indicators that could support schools to evaluate the quality of inclusion.

Method
We adopted a desk research method. The first part of the study has deepened the meaning of inclusion in education. We examine some approaches and epistemologies related to inclusion – e.g. psycho medical, curricular, sociological, inclusive school, capabilities, disabilities studies - and their assumptions and implications (Zanazzi, 2018; D’Alessio et al. 2014; Terzi, 2013; Ainscow et al, 2006; UNESCO, 2009 ecc.). According to different interpretations of inclusion, there are different evaluating frameworks of inclusion. The second phase of our study is represented by a wide document review and an in-depth analysis of the existing tools to evaluate the quality of inclusion. We classified the documents in four categories: 1) thematic data-bases collecting data and indicators related to inclusion (e.g. EASNIE, UNESCO, OECD, Save the Children, Mipex ecc.); 2) evaluation tools of school inclusion (e.g. Loreman et al., 2014; Booth e Ainscow, 2011; Alberta Education, 2013; USR Lombardia, 2016 ecc. ); 3) the literature on school effectiveness and improvement (Scheerens, 2018) and classroom instructional strategies to promote inclusion (van de Grif, 2014; Poliandri, 2019); 4) Italian laws and guidelines issued to support school inclusion processes (MIUR). In this paper, we also describe the criteria adopted to classify documents in our review, including theoretical relevance and the results of empirical research related to it.

Outcomes
The expected result is to define the construct of inclusion and the underlying dimensions for the Italian school system. Furthermore, this study tries to define a set of indicators that we intend to test, in order to evaluate the inclusion processes. The indicators aim to cover dimensions such as teacher’s characteristics and training, school services and resources, classroom environment, educational technologies, instructional strategies, parental involvement, school networks ecc. According to our preliminary findings, inclusion could become a general criterion that guides the reflection on the various content areas of RAV, along with the criteria of equity, participation, quality and differentiation (INVALSI, 2014). Inclusion may no longer represent a specific process area of the RAV, but rather a declination of each area of the different framework dimensions (context, results and processes) to interpret the strengths and weaknesses of the Italian school.

Subject

Interest for

Rights management

Link

Author

Language

Format

Type