東華大學圖書館 |

Inclusion and Segregation : = A Study on Special Education Development in China .

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Inclusion and Segregation :/
其他題名:	A Study on Special Education Development in China .
作者:	Alduais, Ahmed.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (270 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-11, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-11A.
標題:	Education. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28318661click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798728252658

Inclusion and Segregation : = A Study on Special Education Development in China .
Alduais, Ahmed.

Inclusion and Segregation :A Study on Special Education Development in China . - 1 online resource (270 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-11, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Beijing Normal University (People's Republic of China), 2020.

Includes bibliographical references

Purpose: Special education provision in China manifests conflicts and challenges with respect to inclusion and segregation and being capable to address the rights of learners with special educational needs (SENs) to live equally, to learn and to belong. Previous research showed the existence of a parallel special education system, that is Learning in Regular Classrooms (LRC) and inclusion. Others argued that the claimed LRC is not consistent with standards of inclusive education worldwide. While some researchers have looked at the existence of multiple forms of provision, positively-matching the different needs of all learners with SENs and adding uniqueness to the Chinese context; others have argued that it hinders building a national standardised system to ensure the quality of provision. Building upon this existing argument, the present study asks: (1) How are inclusion and segregation addressed before and after the National Plan 2010-2020? (2) How has the government provided special education and inclusive education at various educational levels? (3) How do stakeholders in China understand inclusion and segregation? Methods: Consistent with the pragmatic paradigm, the sequential, explanatory mixed method design, and the Person-Process-Context-Time (PPCT) model of the bioecological system theory, two phases of data collection were performed. The quantitative phase was conducted first and included two sub-phases with the purpose of increasing the data reliability and validity. The first sub-phase used the Ministry of Education Database and included data for eight years for the total number of special education schools, classes, entrants, graduates and enrolled students, enrolled male and female students, schools in urban and rural areas, the number of enrolled primary school students of grade one vs. the number of enrolled senior secondary school of grade three, between 2010 and 2017. The second sub-phase included data for eight years before and after the National Plan (2003-2010, 2011-2018) for the total number of special education schools, total enrolment, new enrolment, graduates, educational personnel and full-time teachers, based on the National Bureau Of Statistics of China (NBSC) database. These data were validated and corroborated by the qualitative phase which also contained two sub-phases. The first sub-phase included policy documents, namely: (a) the National Plan 2010-2020, (b) Compulsory Education Law of the People's Republic of China, (c) Law on the Protection of Persons with Disabilities, and (d) reports and documents from the China Disabled Persons' Federation (CDPF). The second sub-phase included primary data of nine in-depth interviews with special and inclusive education stakeholders, specifically, three administrators, three practitioners and three academics. These collected data were analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistics, and content analysis. Results: There were remarkable differences between the views of the stakeholders and findings on the quantitative phases, albeit, most of the participants seemed to be subjective towards the interpretation and understanding of policy documents in regards to inclusion and segregation. For instance, the participants rejected most of the findings on the quantitative phase including: (a) recording more enrolled males than females in special and inclusive education, (b) a significant gap between rural vs. urban areas in inclusion and segregation, and (c) less enrolled students in senior secondary schools, vocational and university. Although the policy documents reported the need to level up these shortcomings; the participants seemed to be subjective and attributed the existence of these gaps to other factors like population growth, census population, disability census to males, and the large size of the country. However, some views of the participants showed high level of reasonability like the need to implement and apply multiple forms of provision to achieve equality, learning and sense of belongingness to all learners with SENs. These multiple forms ensure all the needs of the learners including (a) learners who have minor disabilities and can fully join regular education schools (i.e. full inclusion), (b) learners who need to be prepared through resource classes before joining regular education schools (i.e. mainstreaming), (c) learners who for disability related reasons are placed in segregated schools (i.e. segregation), and (d) learners who are neither able to join regular education schools, special classes in regular education classes, nor special schools, instead, they are provided with home-education and/or online education which is referred to as exclusion in this study. This term is used in different research to refer to learners with SENs being left out of both regular and special education. In this study, considering the Chinese context, it is used to refer to provision of home education and/or online education to ensure equal rights of education for all. These four forms of provision are parallel. In other words, they all work as pillars of inclusion, the major trend of education for learners with SENs, recently. All in all, these results are evident of the variability in understanding the conflict of inclusion and segregation in providing special and inclusive education in China. Conclusions: Consistent with the PPCT model, the current conflict of inclusion and segregation might be developed using four dimensions starting with considering the personal characteristics of (a) person (i.e. biological: equality, cognitive: learning and emotional: sense of belongingness), by implementing the (b) process (Prevention-Intervention-Compensation PIC model), in a (c) context (marked as a quadripartite system: Inclusion-Mainstreaming-Segregation-Exclusion (IMSE) model, with taking into consideration (d) time, accurate implementation of policies and life transitions. Although the present study encountered a few ontological, epistemological, methodological and procedural shortcomings; it has theoretical and methodological contributions to the study of the development of special education, specifically, provision (i.e. inclusion and segregation). Decision-makers and policy-makers should reconsider the current status of special education from a bioecological perspective. Researchers on special education should attempt large-scale research that is not biased to any research method to reach more plausible findings. Above all, cultural capital (i.e. beliefs towards special education community), social capital (i.e. shared sense about special education community), human capital (i.e. equal employment rights and protected working environment), economic capital (i.e. equal sharing of economy regardless of competitiveness), and financial capital (i.e. funds and support share for special education community) should work collaboratively to achieve equality, provide learning, and ensure sense of belongingness to learners with SENs..

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798728252658Subjects--Topical Terms:

516579
Education.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Inclusive educationIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

Inclusion and Segregation : = A Study on Special Education Development in China .
LDR:08475nmm a2200409K 4500 001 2365101
005 20231213130542.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s2020 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798728252658
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28318661
035 $a AAI28318661
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Alduais, Ahmed. $3 3705924
245 1 0 $a Inclusion and Segregation : $b A Study on Special Education Development in China .
264 0 $c 2020
300 $a 1 online resource (270 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-11, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Deng, Meng.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Beijing Normal University (People's Republic of China), 2020.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Purpose: Special education provision in China manifests conflicts and challenges with respect to inclusion and segregation and being capable to address the rights of learners with special educational needs (SENs) to live equally, to learn and to belong. Previous research showed the existence of a parallel special education system, that is Learning in Regular Classrooms (LRC) and inclusion. Others argued that the claimed LRC is not consistent with standards of inclusive education worldwide. While some researchers have looked at the existence of multiple forms of provision, positively-matching the different needs of all learners with SENs and adding uniqueness to the Chinese context; others have argued that it hinders building a national standardised system to ensure the quality of provision. Building upon this existing argument, the present study asks: (1) How are inclusion and segregation addressed before and after the National Plan 2010-2020? (2) How has the government provided special education and inclusive education at various educational levels? (3) How do stakeholders in China understand inclusion and segregation? Methods: Consistent with the pragmatic paradigm, the sequential, explanatory mixed method design, and the Person-Process-Context-Time (PPCT) model of the bioecological system theory, two phases of data collection were performed. The quantitative phase was conducted first and included two sub-phases with the purpose of increasing the data reliability and validity. The first sub-phase used the Ministry of Education Database and included data for eight years for the total number of special education schools, classes, entrants, graduates and enrolled students, enrolled male and female students, schools in urban and rural areas, the number of enrolled primary school students of grade one vs. the number of enrolled senior secondary school of grade three, between 2010 and 2017. The second sub-phase included data for eight years before and after the National Plan (2003-2010, 2011-2018) for the total number of special education schools, total enrolment, new enrolment, graduates, educational personnel and full-time teachers, based on the National Bureau Of Statistics of China (NBSC) database. These data were validated and corroborated by the qualitative phase which also contained two sub-phases. The first sub-phase included policy documents, namely: (a) the National Plan 2010-2020, (b) Compulsory Education Law of the People's Republic of China, (c) Law on the Protection of Persons with Disabilities, and (d) reports and documents from the China Disabled Persons' Federation (CDPF). The second sub-phase included primary data of nine in-depth interviews with special and inclusive education stakeholders, specifically, three administrators, three practitioners and three academics. These collected data were analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistics, and content analysis. Results: There were remarkable differences between the views of the stakeholders and findings on the quantitative phases, albeit, most of the participants seemed to be subjective towards the interpretation and understanding of policy documents in regards to inclusion and segregation. For instance, the participants rejected most of the findings on the quantitative phase including: (a) recording more enrolled males than females in special and inclusive education, (b) a significant gap between rural vs. urban areas in inclusion and segregation, and (c) less enrolled students in senior secondary schools, vocational and university. Although the policy documents reported the need to level up these shortcomings; the participants seemed to be subjective and attributed the existence of these gaps to other factors like population growth, census population, disability census to males, and the large size of the country. However, some views of the participants showed high level of reasonability like the need to implement and apply multiple forms of provision to achieve equality, learning and sense of belongingness to all learners with SENs. These multiple forms ensure all the needs of the learners including (a) learners who have minor disabilities and can fully join regular education schools (i.e. full inclusion), (b) learners who need to be prepared through resource classes before joining regular education schools (i.e. mainstreaming), (c) learners who for disability related reasons are placed in segregated schools (i.e. segregation), and (d) learners who are neither able to join regular education schools, special classes in regular education classes, nor special schools, instead, they are provided with home-education and/or online education which is referred to as exclusion in this study. This term is used in different research to refer to learners with SENs being left out of both regular and special education. In this study, considering the Chinese context, it is used to refer to provision of home education and/or online education to ensure equal rights of education for all. These four forms of provision are parallel. In other words, they all work as pillars of inclusion, the major trend of education for learners with SENs, recently. All in all, these results are evident of the variability in understanding the conflict of inclusion and segregation in providing special and inclusive education in China. Conclusions: Consistent with the PPCT model, the current conflict of inclusion and segregation might be developed using four dimensions starting with considering the personal characteristics of (a) person (i.e. biological: equality, cognitive: learning and emotional: sense of belongingness), by implementing the (b) process (Prevention-Intervention-Compensation PIC model), in a (c) context (marked as a quadripartite system: Inclusion-Mainstreaming-Segregation-Exclusion (IMSE) model, with taking into consideration (d) time, accurate implementation of policies and life transitions. Although the present study encountered a few ontological, epistemological, methodological and procedural shortcomings; it has theoretical and methodological contributions to the study of the development of special education, specifically, provision (i.e. inclusion and segregation). Decision-makers and policy-makers should reconsider the current status of special education from a bioecological perspective. Researchers on special education should attempt large-scale research that is not biased to any research method to reach more plausible findings. Above all, cultural capital (i.e. beliefs towards special education community), social capital (i.e. shared sense about special education community), human capital (i.e. equal employment rights and protected working environment), economic capital (i.e. equal sharing of economy regardless of competitiveness), and financial capital (i.e. funds and support share for special education community) should work collaboratively to achieve equality, provide learning, and ensure sense of belongingness to learners with SENs..
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Education. $3 516579
650 4 $a Special education. $3 516693
650 4 $a Education policy. $3 2191387
653 $a Inclusive education
653 $a Segregation
653 $a Special education
653 $a Special education development
653 $a China
653 $a Stakeholder views
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0515
690 $a 0529
690 $a 0458
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a Beijing Normal University (People's Republic of China). $b Education. $3 3705925
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-11A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28318661 $z click for full text (PQDT)