Nind, M., Benjamim, S., Sheehy, K., Collins, J. and Hall, K. (2004) Methodological Challenges in Researching Inclusive School Cultures, Educational Review, Vol. 56, No. 3, Carfax Publishing
“Lack of methodological information limits our trust in a study’s outcomes, but also limits the richness of our growing understanding of the methodological challenges related to such complex areas as inclusive education.” (p. 260)
“Our intention was to foreground student voices and experiences and to offer portrayals of inclusive schools that are grounded in extensive observational evidence. What held us together was our interest in what goes on in classrooms (and playgrounds, assemblies, etc.) in interactions between teachers and pupils, and pupils and pupils, and teachers and teachers. It is this common agenda that steered us toward the research questions of:
- What do inclusive school cultures look and feel like to Year 6 pupils and the staff working with them?
- How are processes of inclusion/exclusion produced through the daily interactions of pupils and teachers in schools?
- How do these processes relate to teachers’ stated classroom intentions, to achool policy, and to the larger context of national policy/rhetoric on ‘inclusive education’? ” (p. 260)
“(Pseudonyms are used for the schools and people within them.” (p. 261)
“The methodological challenges that followed ranged from the pragmatic to the ethical and more often than not combined the two. For example, ‘how might we interview the children?’ incorporated how can it feasibly be done and how can it be done responsibly, as equitably as is possible, and without causing harm. Similarly, ‘when will the teachers find time to talk to us?’ meant both finding the actual time and judging whether it was acceptable to take time away from teachers’ contact with pupils and time for solitary reflection and recovery.” (p. 261)
“(…) at classroom level inclusion is a process, a series of choices made throughout the day, thus pre-ordained benchmarks could be misleading and detract from our focus on learning about these intricate choices.” (p. 262)
“We faced the challenge of seeing through the layers of what we found in schools: the official culture, the school culture, classroom culture, playground culture, subcultures related to class, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and so on. Moreover, we needed to see through the pressures upon the schools that shape their culture, such as the pressure of financial survival in the market-economy.” (p. 263)
“There is an attractive simplicity to the idea that we can study schools with an inclusive policy framework and examine the policies enacted in the classroom.” (p. 263)
“There are many occasions when the researcher judges it innappropriate to intervene. She [researcher] has to balance the research agenda of learning about the process with a moral agenda of responsability to the child and a pragmatic agenda of not upsetting the teachers involved. ” (266)
“From the outset we were aware of the danger of making use of the school for our own ends, and the lack of reciprocity this would imply. We wanted to be able to give something back to the schools, both in recognition of their help, and to construct the school and the reseacrh team equal parterns in the enterprise of researching inclusive practice”. (p. 267)
“Our agenda was not to find out ‘what works’ in inclusive education and to report back on this”. (p. 267)
“Our initial vision of involving the school staff in the project as fellow gatherers and analysers of data had already emerged as unrealizable due to their time constraints and different agendas. There were cultural and structural impediments to the sense of partnership we regarded as ideal, as the university and school staff had different pressures, priorities, and roles”. (p. 267)
“Over and above the issue of how much feedback to give to the schools and how to give it, we face the challenge of how to share and publish ‘interesting material’. We do not wish to cover up findings about exclusionary processes as these emerged as a strong theme in the data, but nor do we want to take advantage of the school’s trust. The marketization of schools means that ‘bad publicity’ can be tangibly damagind, which makes the need to ensure anonymity very real. This is a challenge that is very current for us as we write for conferences and publication”. (p. 268)
“Themes that arose from our data included: the ways in which the physical environment contributed to non-participation, notions of ideal class/pupil/parent which were exclusive, within-child notions of ability and (unjustified) faith in tests which were used to categorize and separate pupils”. (p. 268)
“While inclusive practices were to be found (with other emerging themes being children supporting each other’s inclusion, discourses of community and rights, and teacher’s awareness of pupils as people), it was easy sometimes to loose sight of these amid the exclusive practices and cultures”. (p. 268)
“This was a pilot study, and there is much we have learnt from it. (…) There are many things we will do differently, or not do at all, in future projects like this kind. (…) it is also true that a new set of contexts will prsent us with another set of dilemmas with which to engage”. (p. 268)
Extract from references of this article:
ALLAN, J. (1999) Actively Seeking Inclusion: Pupils with special needs in mainstream schools (London, RoutledgeFalmer).
BLYTHMAN, M. (1996) Factoring teachers into the research equation, in: G. LLOYD (Ed) Knitting Progress Unsatisfactory: Gender and Special Issues in Education (Edinburgh, Moray House Institute of Education).
CLOUGH & L. BARTON (Eds) Making Difficulties: Research and the Construction of SEN (London, Paul Chapman).
CORBETT, J. (1999) Special needs, inclusion and exclusion, in: A. HAYTON (Ed) Tackling Disaffection and School Exclusion (London, Kogan Page).
CORBETT, J. (2001) Supporting Inclusive Education: A Connective Pedagogy (London, RoutledgeFalmer).
GOODEY, C. (1999) Learning disabilities: the researcher’s voyage to planet Earth, in: S. HOOD, B. MAYALL & S. LUTZ, F. (1981) Ethnography – the holistic approach to understanding schooling, in: J. GREEN & C. WALLAT (Eds) Ethnography and Language in Educational Settings (Norwood, NJ, Ablex).
MAUTHNER, M. (1997) Methodological aspects of collecting evidence from children: lessons from three research projects, Children and Society, 11, pp. 16-28.
RIX, J. & SIMMONS, K. (2003) A culture for inclusion. Unit 14 Inclusive Education: Learning from Each Other (Milton Keynes, The Open University).
THOMAS, N. & O’KANE, C. (1998) The ethics of participatory research with children, Children and Society, 12, pp. 336-348.