Concepto de deterioro de valor

A study by Heikki Happonen (1998) classifies and evaluates the state of physical special education environments in Finland since 1921.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the historical, typological and evaluated state of physical special education environments in Finland. The historical state of special education environments was examined by analysing the writings related to special education and school environments in pedagogical journals. The currently used special education

According to the results, the special education environments developed before the compulsory school, outside the folk school system. At first they were developed out of philanthropic interest but later they were supported by the state. In general the environments had not been planned to be used as schools, but the environments were soon modified to fit the needs of users. In the compulsory school, during the period 1921–44, the special education environments and classroom practices developed together with the special education system. The school buildings, their quality and special features, were not of primary importance, seen from the viewpoints of the school system and special education. It was more important that special education was created within the school system. The period was characterised as one of emerging special education and relational learning environments.

In the postwar period (1945–69) special education environments were paid attention to as part of the primary school system. At the national level the integration of special education into the school system could be seen in committee reports. The physical environment needs of special education were included in the standard price system, and the network of special schools was greatly expanded. However, the position of special schools in the school system was still rather loosely defined. Special schools were often located in former school buildings that were no longer used, in school buildings far away from other schools, and in buildings that had not originally been built for schools. In compulsory schools a special education environment was supplied by school authorities up to the year 1960, i.e. special educators were not involved in the process. The position of special education was stabilized in 1960 when the first school that was planned for special education was built. During this period new schools were built for special education, often as part of a larger school complex. The period was characterised as the period of integration into school system and that of relational- functional learning environments.

In the period of the comprehensive school (1970– ) attention was paid to special education and its school environments in committees and in research. In addition to special classes, part-time special education developed, which became the major form of special education, if defined in terms of student numbers. The part-time special education had to undergo the same stages of development as special class education. The integration of this form of special education into the school system was more important than the teaching environments. Consequently, special education was organized in diverse, and often poor learning environments. In the 1990s the emphasis in special education moved to special classes. The era was characterised as the period of well-established special education and functional learning environments.

The teaching premises of special education were classified, in this study, into six categories or types. A special class typology includes the following types: traditional, functional, therapeutic, group work, communication, and control types. One-third of the classes were traditional and about half of them were functional and therapeutic. The teaching environments of part-time special education were grouped into small-group, functional- therapeutic, clinical-pedagogical, shared-activities, and consultation types. All teaching environments in the upper stage of the comprehensive school fell into the group work category. In town schools the lower stage teaching environments were typically functional- therapeutic. In the countryside the special education environments were classified as shared- activities ones. The functional-therapeutic type of environment emerged as the ideal type for part-time special education. The most common environments used in special class education were therapeutic, traditional, control and communication types. The therapeutic type appeared

as the ideal type for special class instruction.

Parents’ experiences of the placement of children with disabilities in regular education classes have been investigated by Satu Huhtamäki (1997). Six of eight children have Down’s syndrome. The most important finding was the parents’ overall contentment with the placement. The children’s satisfaction as well as the advantages of such placement were also reflected in the parents’ attitudes. Most of the parents’ negative experiences of the process of placement arose from the negative attitudes shown by some administrators towards placement of this kind.

A study by Irja Jylhä (1998) was based on a visual arts instruction experiment implemented as action research and utilizing the method of co-operative learning. Altogether, five special education pupils and one primary-school class (i.e. a class of the lower stage of the comprehensive school) participated in the study. The participating intellectually disabled were classified as having a mild or medium disability. At the beginning of the two-year experiment, the primary school pupils were on third grade.

On the basis of their interactive skills, the groups could be divided into four categories: co-operative, disintegrating, tutor-managed and integrative. The process of interpretation brought forward the following main themes for the study: towards equality, accepted and rejected, disruptive pupils, and challenges to instruction.

Sanna Pöyhönen (1997) has investigated social inclusion in the classroom community of special needs pupils placed in a regular class. Special needs pupils who were taught mainly in the same space as their classmates interacted with other children both during lessons and recesses. Children without disabilities seemed to accept the special needs pupils although their attitude was somewhat different from the way they reacted to each other. A classroom where each pupil could advance at his or her own pace seemed to be the most favorable study environment in view of the social inclusion of special needs student in the classroom community.

Kristina Ström (1996) states that the teacher and pupil welfare agent roles are the predominant components in the special education teacher’s professional role. The teacher dominance of the professional role is related to the focus on remedial and individual education. The teacher requires not only qualifications but also authority to work at the individual as well as at the group, school and community level.

5.5

France

J. Seknadjé-Askénazi, Professor in the National Centre for Scholastic Adaptation and Integration