Mitchell, DavidRamsay, PeterHendy, Vivien Erica Webb2026-11-092026-11-091995https://hdl.handle.net/10289/18762The mandate given in the Education Act, 1989 opened the doors for students with special educational and developmental needs to enrol in any state school. As with the Draft Review of Special Education (Department of Education, 1987) and the policy announced in the Education Gazette (Department of Education, 1988), there was no explicit commitment to the inclusion of all children with educational or developmental needs into the classrooms with their peers. The terms mainstreaming, integration or inclusion are not mentioned in the legislation which was to reform the administration of education. Major challenges to the school system have occurred because of the implementation of the section of the Education Act, 1989, allowing equal rights to enrol and receive education at state schools for people who have special educational needs (whether because of disability or otherwise). When schools commenced enrolling children following this legislation being enacted, very limited information was available on how they intended to handle the inclusion of the children who were now able to be enrolled and to receive education at state schools, what strategies they had developed and what problems they foresaw. This study aims to investigate how this philosophy was implemented in the everyday life of five schools. The topic of this research is the perception of change and the change process with regard to the inclusion of children with special educational and developmental needs into the regular school. Firstly, to place the study in context, an analysis of the theoretical background to inclusion is given, together with a critical account of the debate surrounding its introduction, both here and overseas. Secondly, because the study is concerned with the implementation of change, an account of the sociological and psychological theories of change is given. A review of existing policy statements at both national and school level has been made in order to understand the policies on equity and equality with regard to children with special educational needs. Information on the implementation of inclusion practices in the everyday life of five schools was gained using an ethnographic method, which was the major approach of this enquiry. Observational practices, followed by interviews, have provided in depth information and clarification of points of concern which arose during fieldwork. The results indicate that inclusion is occurring in these schools and has been reasonably successful, except for one major group of children, those with emotional and behavioural disorders. The success has been indicated by: • the whole school approach to children with special educational and developmental needs, evident in the school culture and the leadership of the principal; • the pleasure expressed by professional staff and parents at the academic and social progress made by individual children in the schools; • the supportive and caring attitudes demonstrated by the peers; • the individual feedback to the teachers and teachers aides, from the children concerned with inclusion who show thanks, friendship, involvement and responsiveness; • the knowledge of the staff that they are being successful in influencing the lives of these children; • the collegiality of professional staff which has developed in the schools with regard to all children, but especially the children with special educational and developmental needs; • the feedback to the principals, teachers and teachers aides from parents, as a result of teacher support and their children’s progress in the school community. There are problems and unsolved issues, though, and these are: • contextual difficulties associated with large classes and demands on time, with no allowance made for managing incidents or release time to prepare programmes or resources; • the lack of teacher aide assistance in some of the classrooms, made worse by withdrawal or reduction of discretionary hours, added to a sense of disillusionment over inclusion. Therefore the allocation of resources to schools proved to be a contentious issue; • the irritation caused when frequent Ministry of Education directives indicating the changing policy failed to change the basic difficulties the schools felt they faced; • the perceived inadequacy of staff development and the limited training available for teachers and teachers aides; • environmental factors which included historic architecture with small rooms, and a lack of appropriate furniture or equipment; • behavioural incidents, student confrontations, lack of discipline and attendance problems on the part of some students; • lack of parental support in association with this last group of children. The fact that inclusion succeeds to the degree it does, in the schools in the study, is because the school culture supports the change, there is decision-making occurring at the school level which energizes this educational change and the professional staff have taken responsibility on a personal basis. However, this is causing stress and strain in some areas and readjustment is occurring at staff level to maintain the equilibrium of the mechanism of inclusion. There is no answer as to how long the school staff, parents and students in these schools can reconcile the difficulties which have been presented in this present research. This study has demonstrated that educational change occurs on many levels and involves decision-making in different arenas of the social system. The complexity of the change process has been examined in the light of the people who have been involved and affected by inclusion, where indeed it has proved to be a very personal experience. The state of educational change which has led to the implementation of inclusion has been tested by the strategies used by the government. A plan outlined by Chin and Benne (1964) indicates that the ‘power-coercive strategy’ which has required inclusion to occur, has not been followed by a financial commitment to the change. Because of the leadership style and values associated with the schools in the study, inclusion has been implemented with varying success, but it is the use of ‘normative-re-educative’ and ‘empirical-rational strategies’ by the principals that have ensured that inclusion has been attained. In the terms of C. Wright Mills, the schools indicated a powerlessness because there were only limited options that could be used in the personal milieu of the staff, boards of trustees and parents. This occurred because those factors which would affect their outlook concerning educational changes and specifically inclusion, were outside their ability to control. For C. Wright Mills, decision-making characterises power, and power implies that there are possibilities of choice in determining which priorities are assigned to certain individuals or groups within a social system. In the course of this research it became evident that the real power of decision-making over limited resources lay with the Minister and the Ministry of Education, while the school community made decisions affecting the professional staff and children at a local level. Bertrand Russell defined power as “the production of intended effects” and distinguished three forms of influence: the use of incentives, deterrents, and coercion (Russell, in Clark, 1974, p.66). Using these approaches the government has followed with ambiguity the world wide trend to inclusion. The schools now find they have the responsibility for a group of children with special educational and developmental needs, without the power to have any but the most basic and personal choices. This thesis details how five schools have taken up this challenge.enAll items in Research Commons are provided for private study and research purposes and are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.Thesis